Thursday, May 31, 2007

 

JSH: Bulletin is sitting on this one

One of the things I've liked about the Bulletin of the AMS is that they're rather quick with rejections, which is all I've gotten over the years, so I don't spend much time wondering about them, versus like the freaking Annals of Mathematics which is now on my crap list.

They keep you waiting for the inevitable rejection, where they never give a good reason either!

So like I said after I tested things a bit with some posts on newsgroups—which is one of the purposes for my posting as I look to see if people can point out errors—I sent my paper off to number theorists around the world from Australia to Washington state here in the US, and I submitted it for publication to the Bulletin of the AMS.

And I haven't heard back from them, which is a first! They're usually quick with a rejection, normally from the chief editor. Maybe that person is on vacation?

In any event, in the meantime the paper has changed! I've been fiddling with it after arguing with people as I realize I can add clarity in various ways.

The CURRENT paper is on a page at my Extreme Mathematics Google Group:

http://groups.google.com/group/extrememathematics/web/non-polynomial-factorization-paper

The direct link to the pdf is:

http://groups.google.com/group/extrememathematics/web/NonPolynomialFactorization.pdf

But now I'm at a bit of a loss, as I'm just waiting on rejection from the Bulletin, which has an older draft, but then again, maybe I should update them with the current paper? But how?

And why bother? Like it matters, as the AMS hates me.

One thing I know is that no matter what happens the American Mathematical Society will despise me, which is kind of funny.

A major amateur mathematician hated by the organization for mathematics in his own country.

But that is America—the land of contradictions. So brilliant in so many ways, and so completely lost in others.

But I like it. Of course it helps to see the humor in it.

[A reply to someone who wrote that James will never get a reply from the editors.]

I have always heard before. I do this rather regularly.

ALWAYS before, I'd get a rather quick email in reply, usually from the chief editor. It's just a perk of being me.

You on the other hand may not get a reply.

I always do.

Um, what errors?

[A reply to someone who wrote that James doesn't give a crap about the math and that all he wants is fame and fortune.]

And you care about math? You loser who'd rather fight for faux proofs than admit basic math?

You care about your job.

You are scared that if the truth comes out then all your posts come back to haunt you, and you'll be fired. Guess what? You will.

You coward.

I can be crazy. Most mathematical geniuses at my level are freaking bonkers.

But what's your excuse?

Everything I've said before fits in with who I am.

It's hard to stay sane with knowledge like I have. It's hard to control the truth fighting to be freed through you without your choice.

The genie will not be denied. But that is my burden and my pain that goes on and on and on.

What's your excuse?

[A reply to the same poster, who wrote that he has a job because he knows the math and he doesn't rely on someone to tell him whether or not something is right or not.]

You have a job because the people in charge of you keep you.

If it is true that I am this great discoverer, and your posts get back to your employers, then reasonably, you can expect that you no longer will have a job, as they will no longer want to keep you.

That is your motivation.

You ARE a coward.

You do not give a damn about mathematics and THAT is why you will be fired, not because of your previous posts, but because of these recent ones.

Mathematics is not just some thing, something you can use to feel important.

Without mathematics we would not have human civilization.

People like you are a threat to the future of humanity itself.

Make no mistake, I will feel no pity, and show no mercy.

None of my predecessors did, not Newton, not Archimedes.

And neither will I.

[A reply to someone who wrote that James cannot accept that he is a failure at Mathematics.]

They didn't.

Failing at math is not a bad thing. Most people do fail at math.

Pretending to be someone who succeeds, relying on other failures to keep up the lie, now that is something else entirely.

Mathematics has a heart and soul, and ultimately it is Mathematics that is coming for you people.

But because you're actors who think mathematics is just some game of pretend you have no comprehension that the discipline itself is what you should be afraid of, not me.

I'm starting to spread things out a bit, as I go to primes, while pushing everything else, while there is also action off the newsgroups.

More than likely it will be the copy protection idea that breaks you people, and then the rest will pile on, as money is what matters, so yes, you people could block some prime stuff, as if people REALLY care about prime numbers, and how many people care if you have some silly one hundred plus year old mistake?

But give the world a way to keep people from casually copying DVD's and see what happens.

You people need to understand how unimportant everything you do really is by considering that comparison.

The world didn't give a damn about prime numbers and couldn't care less about the screw-ups with the ring of algebraic integers.

But copying DVD's? Yeah, the world cares about that so you can just wait to see how much.

What I think might finally actually happen is that soon some of you will no longer be pretending to be mathematicians and actually getting paid, but you can keep posting and be cranks!

Which is what you actually are now anyway.

Don't be afraid of me. In many ways I'm dragged along with all of this myself, being pulled by higher powers who seem to have it in for you people in a big way so there is a big setup here with a lot of humiliation to be delivered…which is why it took so long.

The discipline wants revenge against the pretenders, and wants it served cold…





<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?