Harristotelian Logic

Part of extreme problem solving is, you toss out the ideas, and at some point you have to pause and kind of look over what might have bubbled through, or you might say, stuck to the wall.

I have been brainstorming a legal option, just in case.

A lot has been said over the last few days and a pause can give me time to consider that, while of course, I don't expect others to pause so feel free to keep replying in my threads as I will be looking at feedback as usual.

At this juncture my take on events is that once again—as I've done it before—I've caught posters lying about unique features of my research proving how important those features are, only to then claim that what they lied about wasn't really important when cornered!!!

I've come up with a basic argument that might mean that universities can be sued when their academics break the public trust.

And I've put out a teaser about how my prime counting function is unique in a special way that makes it a key that unlocks the door to what was previously never known—in all of human history—as I begin to wrap up the outlines of both how my research is important, and work at figuring out why math people would lie about it.

I will add that one of the puzzles for me over the four plus years since I first made my prime counting discovery has been how easily people who argue with me get away with lying about it, and my take on it is that we trust people.

Yup. I think mostly it comes down to basic human trust, which is so necessary in our modern world.

And it is so unimaginable that highly intelligent people would actually lie about an important mathematical discovery, and get away with it for years that a lot of people just decide it can't be important, or they figure, hey, yeah, rotten world, but it's not my problem.

So what? Mathematicians are just more corrupt people in a corrupt world?

Like that's news?

I think I'll try to let things percolate until Jan 8th. Until then.