Friday, November 06, 2009


JSH: Considering my math blog

Ok, so I don't have to post to Usenet to get readers. I do have a math blog and have REALLY hoped I could just post from my blog and that would handle everything. And I do get readers. I get roughly 30 to 40 unique hits a day according to several analytics software products. That's about 1000 people per month or roughly 10000 per year. And from 40 to 60 countries per month, and over 100+ countries per year.

So I figured, hey, that should mean that if I'm right someone would notice. But time just keeps passing, so I keep trying to delve more deeply into the data to see what's happening.

One thing with a massive impact DOES seem to be one page which is a webpage by Erik Max Francis who I have argued with on the sci.math newsgroup and searches on my name related to math pull up his page #1. Also there is the way visitors are using my site in many cases which is as a reference.

The two points may seem contradictory: a hate page insulting me is pulled up highly with my name while looking at user activity on my math blog indicates they are just using it as a reference, but the explanation is bizarre and simple.

Usenet attacks have been personal and effective in painting me personally as a crackpot, which is easily verified by web searches. Just search on: james harris

I just did that and the Erik Max Francis page blasting me as a crank comes up #18.

But if you wish to solve quadratic residues who do you think comes up #2? Not me exactly, MY PAGE comes up!

The math is pulling up highly and usage that I'm seeing on the site comes up in a pattern consistent with that assessment: people from all over the world are coming to my site as a math reference, presumably getting the info they need, and then going on their way!

What I do with Usenet posts like this one, or the other threads on this group or threads on other newsgroups, is look to see how I can shift the patterns by doing what you could call experiments. Then I adjust strategy across my websites.

Presumably if enough time passes—think YEARS—the dominance of my ideas will pull me along, crush negatives like remove the influence of Erik Max Francis or other negative posters, and end this bizarre situation.

But history shows it can actually take DECADES, so I'm brainstorming out faster solutions, like promoting various research to see what impact it has.

Here I focus on solving quadratic residues. Prior to this I focused on my prime counting function on other newsgroups. At other times I've talked about the core error I found in number theory, where a paper seems to have triggered the math community into destroying one of their journals.

And I have other mathematical finds that I can pull in at will as well.

So you are part of one experimental foray to see how the impact of the world's first way to generally solve quadratic residues modulo N fares in a natural environment. So far nothing new!

I'm seeing the same type responses as in the past. And getting roughly the same feel as before. Which is what also occurred on other newsgroups.

My math blog has not seen a shift in usage. Country patterns remain the same. Areas of hits have barely budged though there have been really tiny mini-spikes from occasions when some posters have put up links to my blogs in response to me.

Quite simply the math blog behaves as if you don't exist, except for Erik Max Francis, where I continue to see hits coming from his website which has a continuing influence that puzzles me.

One theory is that it's easier to control people with negatives than positives, and easier to convince with negatives than most people realize. As, he hasn't even had to update his page! But as long as it sits there, it stays highly rated, and is clearly a massive driver of my own personal negatives.

My negative numbers are HUGE. Increasingly I'm one of the few people in the world whose name is popping up on webpages around the world month after month, year after year, where most of those people have no idea who this "James Harris" guy is, but if they look, oh, he's a crackpot, but hey, this math thing works, so…

Credit that Erik Max Francis with having a site that is massively powerful, but that also means that if anyone breaks through it should be easy to prove that his site is critical in many people's assessments of value. So the negatives he puts out are VERY effective.

I call it a social transistor effect: all by himself Erik Max Francis may be able to squash people just by putting up a page on his website, and have that squashing effect last indefinitely no matter what they do, or even how much their research is used, around the world.

He is very effective.

<< Home

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