Sunday, April 15, 2007
JSH: Strange will to be wrong
I think one of the biggest puzzles for me as I wait and hope that the latest very simple explanation of a problem in number theory might finally get some traction is this strange will to be wrong that many of you clearly have.
One would think that some of you actually would like to use correct mathematics, and not waste time and effort with mathematical ideas proven to be wrong, and that at least some of you would actually care about learning powerful mathematical techniques that DO WORK versus wasting time on flawed ones that have been proven not to work.
But I guess most of you tell yourselves that's not what you're doing so you can do it, which is how this situation has continued for so many years.
And then you must feel pride at learning useless crap that doesn't work, but maybe impresses people because so many people are a part of the error?
So this time I updated a technique that I first thought up late last year as now I start with the factorization
2975x^2 - 15x + 2 = 2(f(x) + 1)*(g(x) + 1)
where the change was to leverage two prime numbers so that I can step through the derivation with 7 and 17 versus just 7 as that didn't work with you as I got some of the same people on sci.math who would come over to other newsgroups mind you as well, tossing up specious objections which sounded intelligent, I guess, and that crap worked like it has worked so many times before.
By using two prime numbers though I remove the ability of those people to make seemingly intelligent objections but people remember I have not only explained and explained as I've come up with different ways to try and get mathematicians to behave like mathematicians and accept mathematical proof, I've even had the result published in a peer reviewed mathematical journal!!!
Usenet crushed the process as sci.math'ers managed to convince the editors to pull my paper, and later the entire journal died.
A an entire mathematical journal died here yet still the error has stayed in place along with the denial in this will to be wrong.
That takes a will to be wrong for that to happen and years to go by while I labor to try and find some way to explain that doesn't allow you to tell yourselves lies about the math so you can keep doing wrong mathematics.
Wrong mathematics is EASIER.
There is a thrill in feeling you are correct because you are using flawed ideas that allow you to convince yourself that you have proven something you haven't.
But now we have a situation where a lot of people around the world are choosing easy, doing wrong mathematics, on a huge scale. So yes, I can understand if say Andrew Wiles wouldn't want to accept this result as it takes away his research, so no, he did not prove Fermat's Last Theorem. And Ribet might want to hide from this because it takes away his, and I'm not saying either of them are doing so, but I'm giving them as dramatic examples to explain the why of the very human behavior here.
But wrong is wrong. You people can keep doing wrong math to "prove" things all you want and you are not doing anything of value no matter how many of you get together to live in the error.
Wrong mathematical ideas are easier because they let you "prove" anything, like the classic examples that boil down to divide by zero errors.
So yeah, do the wrong math, and use the ring of algebraic integers wrong, without understanding its quirks and real mathematical properties, and you can think you proved Fermat's Last Theorem when you didn't.
Wrong math is easier, but it's still wrong.
My hope is that some of you start appreciating mathematics. Because of the last few years Usenet has been doing the opposite, using group processes to make this situation much harder in a fight to be wrong.
And in a fight to keep bringing other people into the error as pity the poor students, who could have been learning the truth years ago, but instead are currently wasting time and mental energy on bogus mathematical ideas that are appealing because they are wrong, and in mathematics, wrong is easier.
It is so, so much harder to be right in mathematics.
One would think that some of you actually would like to use correct mathematics, and not waste time and effort with mathematical ideas proven to be wrong, and that at least some of you would actually care about learning powerful mathematical techniques that DO WORK versus wasting time on flawed ones that have been proven not to work.
But I guess most of you tell yourselves that's not what you're doing so you can do it, which is how this situation has continued for so many years.
And then you must feel pride at learning useless crap that doesn't work, but maybe impresses people because so many people are a part of the error?
So this time I updated a technique that I first thought up late last year as now I start with the factorization
2975x^2 - 15x + 2 = 2(f(x) + 1)*(g(x) + 1)
where the change was to leverage two prime numbers so that I can step through the derivation with 7 and 17 versus just 7 as that didn't work with you as I got some of the same people on sci.math who would come over to other newsgroups mind you as well, tossing up specious objections which sounded intelligent, I guess, and that crap worked like it has worked so many times before.
By using two prime numbers though I remove the ability of those people to make seemingly intelligent objections but people remember I have not only explained and explained as I've come up with different ways to try and get mathematicians to behave like mathematicians and accept mathematical proof, I've even had the result published in a peer reviewed mathematical journal!!!
Usenet crushed the process as sci.math'ers managed to convince the editors to pull my paper, and later the entire journal died.
A an entire mathematical journal died here yet still the error has stayed in place along with the denial in this will to be wrong.
That takes a will to be wrong for that to happen and years to go by while I labor to try and find some way to explain that doesn't allow you to tell yourselves lies about the math so you can keep doing wrong mathematics.
Wrong mathematics is EASIER.
There is a thrill in feeling you are correct because you are using flawed ideas that allow you to convince yourself that you have proven something you haven't.
But now we have a situation where a lot of people around the world are choosing easy, doing wrong mathematics, on a huge scale. So yes, I can understand if say Andrew Wiles wouldn't want to accept this result as it takes away his research, so no, he did not prove Fermat's Last Theorem. And Ribet might want to hide from this because it takes away his, and I'm not saying either of them are doing so, but I'm giving them as dramatic examples to explain the why of the very human behavior here.
But wrong is wrong. You people can keep doing wrong math to "prove" things all you want and you are not doing anything of value no matter how many of you get together to live in the error.
Wrong mathematical ideas are easier because they let you "prove" anything, like the classic examples that boil down to divide by zero errors.
So yeah, do the wrong math, and use the ring of algebraic integers wrong, without understanding its quirks and real mathematical properties, and you can think you proved Fermat's Last Theorem when you didn't.
Wrong math is easier, but it's still wrong.
My hope is that some of you start appreciating mathematics. Because of the last few years Usenet has been doing the opposite, using group processes to make this situation much harder in a fight to be wrong.
And in a fight to keep bringing other people into the error as pity the poor students, who could have been learning the truth years ago, but instead are currently wasting time and mental energy on bogus mathematical ideas that are appealing because they are wrong, and in mathematics, wrong is easier.
It is so, so much harder to be right in mathematics.
# posted by James Harris @ 14:20 
