## JSH: Fairly straightforward

So yeah, some guy going on and on about mathematical arguments that are wrong can be annoying, but what if he gets something right?

Then who cares? Right? If you care about mathematics for real then you take the good, and you take the bad and just accept what has to be true.

And THAT is what was so devastating for me, years ago, when I realized that there are so many people in the mathematical community who don't think that way.

They pick and choose.

And they think if they don't like a person they can justify ignoring what the person discovers because of what that person can get from those discoveries.

So they care more about the gain.

There is no way that math people give a damn if I get famous or make a lot of money from my mathematical discoveries if they aren't obsessed over getting famous and making a lot of money—probably figuring that it's just something they won't get, but maybe…

If they just care about the mathematics, then who cares what I get?

If money means nothing, and if fame means nothing, and the mathematics means EVERYTHING then all that matters is getting the knowledge and marveling over the mathematical reality.

But you people pick and choose, now don't you?

And you do so calculating what you think I'll get based on how you react.

Ergo, you don't really care about the mathematical truth.

You cannot.

If you did then you would behave as people who do.

As Forrest Gump might say, people are as people do.

I feel like Forrest Gump—the guy who did what a group of people didn't think was possible but then they showed that they didn't give a damn about their own area, but only what they thought it could give them.

Intelligence is as intelligence does.

Loving mathematics is about loving what mathematics is.

Not what you wish it were.

x^2 = y^2 + T - 2(k^2 + 12j + 36j^2) - 3(k+6j)r

That's a mathematical equation. It just is. What it tells is about mathematical truth.

If x, y, T and k are constant, then as j varies, r must vary to counterbalance it and it will tend to be negative as j increases either positively or negatively.

That can hurt though as it shows a way to factor when you generalize to p odd prime.

Using just 2x = k + pr, and z^2 = y^2 + nT and z = x + k.

Beautiful mathematics in its conciseness but possibly repulsive to some of you because you see it as validating me and my approaches, and what I call Extreme Mathematics, and arguing with people and getting a lot wrong just for WHAT YOU GET RIGHT.

And hating the process and hating a person can be everything to you because you do not love the mathematical truth, so why later should you be allowed to stay in the mathematical field and claim to be a mathematician?

Why?

Because people like you and feel sorry for you?

Because even if you can't do real mathematics you really, really, really want to believe that you can?

[A reply to someone who called James “narcissist”.]

So? Even if I were, so? I don't go around trying to find people to verbally assault claiming it's their fault. You do.

I work at hard math problems.

I get a lot wrong.

And I know that it can take a lot out of you to do the effort to get something right.

Then I consider creatures like yourself who think that it is my job to just sit back and be nice when I get it right and think about how much damage someone like you can do.

What if instead I try to make it harder for your type to operate?

Why shouldn't I?

Why shouldn't I make certain that you get the full consequences based on reality?

Nothing any of you do here is truly anonymous.

All of you as wanted will be tracked down and known.

To me justifying my support of that activity is all about how much time I've spent thinking about the kind of people who make an effort to try and find other people as prey.

I've pondered those who look to try and find vulnerable people that they think they can feed on in some way, so yeah, to such parasites a guy they think is just giving wrong answers all the time when math society says he's wrong could be one of these vulnerable humans.

So I studied that behavior. Contemplated it. Pondered what it meant about the creatures who displayed it.

But what if he's a great discoverer when no one really knows what one is like as it has been so long since one was here and none have been around in the Internet age when you could talk to one repeatedly in a direct way?

Why if you got it so wrong should I not let you feel the full consequence of that failure?

The answer is, I should not.

It is not in my nature to do so, so it must be then that you will discover reality is not as simple as you thought, and that human prey can turn out to be more than you ever thought possible because being a parasite is about what was.

While I am about the future and what will be.

No major discover has emerged before in the Internet age.

No one has been around for you to know exactly what a person like me is like, so you have no clue what is coming.

The simplest way to describe it, is change.