Wednesday, February 03, 2010
JSH: How are they still blocking?
Lately I've started throwing everything but the kitchen sink at the problem of these important math results that are being blocked, or I assume they're being blocked as presumably things like mathematical proof of a random distribution are important.
Oh, and Usenet is a test area. I have 3 blogs, and a math group, as well as other outlets for various ideas. I come in on Usenet to try things out, and often mainly to brainstorm, like now.
So why would the world be so slow about picking up things easily demonstrated?
The twin primes result is actually over 3 years old, and you can easily see a probabilistic piece in the twin primes constant that is part of current literature. And aren't there a lot of groups around the world who could use a distribution proven to be perfectly random?
It does puzzle me. Like even the conic parameterization. It's just knowledge. So some people denigrate a set of equations because they call something "Pell's Equation" and consider it only with integers, why does that block hold with the entire world?
And if mathematicians ARE deliberately claiming that random does not exist with primes, by wrapping up the prime distribution with issues like twin primes probability when you can separate it as I've shown, then why would people still trust them?
The dodge is so trivial that the simplification is astounding.
So it'd take some really weak people to even need that dodge, except that there is a lot of money to be made with prime numbers.
But if it's so transparent and there are some very smart people in this world, most of whom aren't part of the cash machine anyway, or hopefully wouldn't care for such a thing anyway, why do they remain silent?
Politics should only work so far. With so many people able to use the mathematics that is clearly seen, there should be a lot of pressure for it to be so used. And don't babble about me being wrong. The twin primes probability example itself is so easy people can play with it on their home computers with a few calculations and watch it work. AND see the key equation within the mathematical literature in the twin primes constant itself. Unbelievable validation, right in front of anyone.
Ok, so brainstorming this issue now. The Usenet experiments continue as I ponder more things to throw on the network, while my main sources have what I call the pure stream. No arguing. No rants or ravings. Just the arguments presented in areas where I have analytics data telling me it's being pumped out to 50+ countries every 30 days.
Today alone my math blog had visits from: Britain, US, Germany, Netherlands, Sweden, Brazil, Poland and Malaysia
Looking at what they were interested in, some clearly weren't math sophisticates, but presumably some were. What do they do when they see the math world as they thought they knew it, shredded down to a world of simple greed and lies? Of politics and academics fighting for grant dollars at the expense of the human race?
Maybe it just turns them off from it all, eh?
Maybe they just get sick inside and decide to think about anything else.
Oh, and Usenet is a test area. I have 3 blogs, and a math group, as well as other outlets for various ideas. I come in on Usenet to try things out, and often mainly to brainstorm, like now.
So why would the world be so slow about picking up things easily demonstrated?
The twin primes result is actually over 3 years old, and you can easily see a probabilistic piece in the twin primes constant that is part of current literature. And aren't there a lot of groups around the world who could use a distribution proven to be perfectly random?
It does puzzle me. Like even the conic parameterization. It's just knowledge. So some people denigrate a set of equations because they call something "Pell's Equation" and consider it only with integers, why does that block hold with the entire world?
And if mathematicians ARE deliberately claiming that random does not exist with primes, by wrapping up the prime distribution with issues like twin primes probability when you can separate it as I've shown, then why would people still trust them?
The dodge is so trivial that the simplification is astounding.
So it'd take some really weak people to even need that dodge, except that there is a lot of money to be made with prime numbers.
But if it's so transparent and there are some very smart people in this world, most of whom aren't part of the cash machine anyway, or hopefully wouldn't care for such a thing anyway, why do they remain silent?
Politics should only work so far. With so many people able to use the mathematics that is clearly seen, there should be a lot of pressure for it to be so used. And don't babble about me being wrong. The twin primes probability example itself is so easy people can play with it on their home computers with a few calculations and watch it work. AND see the key equation within the mathematical literature in the twin primes constant itself. Unbelievable validation, right in front of anyone.
Ok, so brainstorming this issue now. The Usenet experiments continue as I ponder more things to throw on the network, while my main sources have what I call the pure stream. No arguing. No rants or ravings. Just the arguments presented in areas where I have analytics data telling me it's being pumped out to 50+ countries every 30 days.
Today alone my math blog had visits from: Britain, US, Germany, Netherlands, Sweden, Brazil, Poland and Malaysia
Looking at what they were interested in, some clearly weren't math sophisticates, but presumably some were. What do they do when they see the math world as they thought they knew it, shredded down to a world of simple greed and lies? Of politics and academics fighting for grant dollars at the expense of the human race?
Maybe it just turns them off from it all, eh?
Maybe they just get sick inside and decide to think about anything else.
# posted by James Harris @ 00:09 
