Saturday, May 19, 2007

 

JSH: Suggestions?

I'm not a professional mathematician, so my efforts can be called recreational.

Years ago I got a paper published, and sci.math'ers went after it, and got it retracted by the journal editors with some emails. The journal later died, shutting down after one more edition.

The sci.math'ers of course have maintained that my paper was wrong, and that they were right.

Over the years I've worked at explanations of my research that take away the objections they relied upon so that I can convince that my original work was valid, and they were wrong.

I finally have that paper which I've tested in posts to this newsgroup and alt.math and alt.math.undergrad as understandably I do not like the sci.math newsgroup, but was not surprised that sci.math'ers came over to attack my paper.

And I have been gratified that their tactics have failed this time as the paper does cover everything as I need against their kind of opposition.

They use tactics that I've learned over the years are not about getting to the truth, but about convincing people that I am wrong, so I have directly answered those tactics with proof presented in such a way as to shut them down.

But what now?

Journals are wary of me now. After all, one journal keeled over and died!!!

The paper is available to the world on a Google group of mine, but that seems like a crap shoot—waiting and hoping that someone will notice this result.

And what a result!!!

I managed to use identities to get some incredible number theory analysis done.

And that's so simple of a thing, like people use identities all the time in mathematics.

e.g.

x^2 + 2xy = z^2

add y^2 to both sides to get

x^2 + 2xy + y^2 = y^2 + z^2

and you can solve for x:

x = sqrt(y^2 + z^2) - y

So I have a remarkable technique that relies on subtracting from identities, extending mathematics. Growing knowledge.

A spectacular story that even includes an entire mathematical journal imploding, and the will of a newsgroup against the foundations of mathematics itself where Usenet posters managed to trump the formal peer review process—and I'm stuck.

The real world is often about comfort, and just like inconvenient truths can get fought in other areas, so can they in mathematics.

As long as people like you allow mathematicians to not do their jobs for their own comfort against knowledge, there will not be change.

No matter what they say, mathematicians are highly political people. I think they claim to be otherwise to protect themselves.

But remember, those mathematicians at that journal that originally published my research caved with just a few emails from some sci.math'ers and consider that my research is bold, innovative, and correct, relying at its base on using identities in a very powerful way for analysis.

If you were a mathematician at a major university considering having your life significantly changed by accepting the truth, or sitting back like you just didn't know so that things could go as before, might you not be tempted if you thought you could get away with it?

Mathematicians are human beings too.

So then, what do I do? If mathematicians work to close all the doors against an inconvenient truth, what options do I have?





<< Home

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