Deeper than primes

Status
Not open for further replies.
doronshadmi said:
http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=5014&page=4
Click to expand...
For more comedy on the Doron/Matt Grime battle, see this thread, from post #292. moshek (= Moshe Klein, the kindergarten teacher) quotes from post #287. Post #294 is Doron's threat to call Matt's university. Note also his use of the word "vulgarity".

Skeptic said:
The short version is:
Click to expand...
It's much much longer than I hoped for. Thanks for the summary, it is comedy gold!

Skeptic said:
5). Others complain that, in two days, he made about 50 edits of two entries
Click to expand...
Yes, editing is hard :D.

Skeptic said:
d). He writes long-winded gibberish about theology as well as about mathematics (Cranks are very prolific in their gibberish). Example paragraph (they all are of the same kind):
Click to expand...
Well, at least there's more words to it. Most of his "mathematical" gibberish leaves me (at least at first) puzzled how he hopped from one thing to another.

nathan said:
I think I see a signature :)
Click to expand...
Me too :)

Doron, as you're still around anyway, care to answer my post #463? You've left quite some unanswered questions here that just beg for clarification.

Oh, and when you want to complain: that triangle-shaped button with an exclamation mark, on the left, is for reporting a post. Learning to use an internet forum is difficult, I understand, and you've only used 40+ thus far. The moderators especially appreciate it if you send in a dozen or so reports in a row. :rolleyes:
 
:DLOL, this keeps getting better and better. I guess there will be more corndogs after all.
 
TMiguel said:
:DLOL, this keeps getting better and better. I guess there will be more corndogs after all.
Click to expand...

Oh, what about this one: "Two different models of infinity" in a computer security forum, section "Cryptographic Theory".

Just google for "complementarytheory" (as one word). It's the name of his geocities webpage, where he has stored all his PDFs. You won't get false hits, as it's nowhere else used as a single word; and it gives a complete view on Doron's web activities, as he invariably links to one of those PDFs.

But yes, were are the corndogs?
 
ddt said:
But yes, were are the corndogs?
Click to expand...

I have to say that when I was in NYC this summer we went to Coney Island, but I was too full from lunch, so had to pass on Nathan's corn dogs :( So I've yet to devour that culinary delight.
 
nathan said:
I have to say that when I was in NYC this summer we went to Coney Island, but I was too full from lunch, so had to pass on Nathan's corn dogs :( So I've yet to devour that culinary delight.
Click to expand...

With all this talk about corn dogs, I'm getting really curious about the phenomenon. Too bad we don't have them over here. I could offer a typical Dutch snack: the FrikandelWP - especially tasty as "frikandel speciaal" with mayonnaise, curry sauce and chopped onions.

Apropos Doron's editing behavior, you should take a look at his "User Contributions" page at wikipedia. You don't have to be able to read Hebrew to see what the complaint about the frequent edits was about: whenever he edited a page, at least 2 edits of the same page followed within minutes...

I was further reminded of Doron's "letter to Alain Connes" he posted to another forum:
Four years ago, Moshe Klein heard your lecture about Non-commutative Geometry, which was given in "100 to Hilbert" U.C.L.A conference.

You closed your lecture with these words: " ...We need a new understanding in Mathematics which is based on geometry more then on logic".

For the past 20 years I have developed a mathematical framework, which uses geometrical notions, in order to research the most fundamental mathematical concepts, (like set, number, point, segment, function, continuum, discreteness, finite, non-finite,... etc.) according to this orientation.
Click to expand...
That Alain Connes said this (as claimed earlier by Moshe Klein, the kindergarten teacher, here) cannot be verified as his lecture has not been published AFAIK. So it's a vacuous claim, and probably misrepresented anyway.

However, Prof. Alain Connes has a very interesting paper, "A View of Mathematics", on his website. It starts with:
It might be tempting at first to view mathematics as the union of separate parts such as Geometry, Algebra, Analysis, Number theory etc... where the first is dominated by the understanding of the concept of “space”, the second by the art of manipulating “symbols”, the next by the access to “infinity” and the “continuum” etc...

This however does not do justice to one of the most essential features of the mathematical world, namely that it is virtually impossible to isolate any of the above parts from the others without depriving them from their essence. In that way the corpus of mathematics does resemble a biological entity which can only survive as a whole and would perish if separated into disjoint pieces.
Click to expand...
and the rest of the paper is permeated by the concept of different mathematical branches (in particular, geometry and algebra) contributing to each other.
 
doronshadmi said:
MAF is REI (Relation\Element Interaction):

"The first embryo of mental picture of the mathematical world one can start from is that of a network of bewildering complexity between basic concepts." ( http://alainconnes.org/docs/maths.pdf )
Click to expand...

Sigh. Defining an undefined concept in terms of another undefined concept, is not defining it. Referring to a paper that uses neither term is not a definition either.

Define your terms, or go away.
 
doronshadmi said:
MAF ( http://www.geocities.com/complementarytheory/UR.pdf ) is REI (Relation\Element Interaction):

"The first embryo of mental picture of the mathematical world one can start from is that of a network of bewildering complexity between basic concepts." ( http://alainconnes.org/docs/maths.pdf )

EDIT:

"between" = relation

"basic concopts" = elements
Click to expand...


Looks like I’m late to the party and might have missed all the fun, anyway seeing Doron finally indicate what he has edited and added to a post is a gift I will not soon forget.
 
This however does not do justice to one of the most essential features of the mathematical world, namely that it is virtually impossible to isolate any of the above parts from the others without depriving them from their essence. In that way the corpus of mathematics does resemble a biological entity which can only survive as a whole and would perish if separated into disjoint pieces.
Click to expand...
( http://alainconnes.org/docs/maths.pdf )

In other words, the Organic Paradigm of the mathematical science (trunk(=essence)\branches interaction):

http://www.geocities.com/complementarytheory/OM.pdf

http://www.geocities.com/complementarytheory/UR.pdf
 
Last edited:
How you doing on coming up with any evidence to support your claims, doron?

You remember: (1) Provide any interesting example of MAF (complete with the specifics of what relation _ represents and what element * represents), and (2) Name any branch of Mathematics that is isolated from the others.

Got anything? Anything at all?
 
jsfisher said:
Oh, great! Yet another reference doron doesn't understand.
Click to expand...
Had you expected otherwise?

The Man said:
Looks like I’m late to the party and might have missed all the fun, anyway seeing Doron finally indicate what he has edited and added to a post is a gift I will not soon forget.
Click to expand...
We'll cherish it! Is it worthy of nomination?

doronshadmi said:
http://www.geocities.com/complementarytheory/OM.pdf

http://www.geocities.com/complementarytheory/UR.pdf
Click to expand...

I haven't read the MA in a long time, but isn't this constant referral to the same tired PDF's a sort of spamming?
 
I had intended to persue my interest in Doron's "Universal Reasoning" or "Complementary Logic" in his thread at philosophy-forums.com. I was able to register there but unable to post. And now the philosophy-forums has vanished from the web. Since Doron is still checking in here, I'll say a few words and see where it goes.

Buried beneath Doron's landfill of missused and discarded mathematical terminology is an actual idea. Once it's made clear, then it can be discussed and critiqued in an intelligent way. It rarely comes to that because Doron's way of thinking is counterintuitive, as if from some culture isolated from the rest of the world.

Now that we're in the Philosophy Section, I feel I can discuss Doron from a more general than mathematical angle.

Back in Post#295 of this thread, I posted this simplistic into to Doron's frame of thinking:

Doron posits a fundamental, essentail association of all abstract concepts prior to whatever meanings or designations given concepts may have.
This is his "X/Y Complementation."

For any abstract concept X, there is a polar opposite concept Y.
In interactive combination (He calls it "Complementation.") they yield a matix of new concepts which in turn follow this "pre-axiomatic" rule of association.

It doesn't make any difference what the X and Y designate, they already follow the Rule.

When it comes to Logic this prior "complementation" yields the usual values of "True" and "False." but in the interactive combo of these polar opposites, he also gets the True False and the False True.

In sets, the program yields a state where completion is not the final word, but there is the incomplete complete and the complete incomplete.

In Numerology (Yes, I'm sarcastic here, because I like to call Doron's "Organic Natural Numbers" "paranormal" numbers." But this is a somewhat unfair caricature.) Doron's fundamental rule of association yields not only the familiar counting numbers, but a host of new critters such as 2_3 or 3_2 where the first number of the pair is adjectival.

Again this is very simplistic, but it is the basic idea, the Yin-Yang of it, so to speak.

If you get the idea, then there are a host of questions and critcisms that are not being addressed. I hope we can move on to these and not back to the years of forum wreckage and debacle Doron has behind him.
It will be more interesting if we can get to questions that are relevant to the very different way Doron thinks.
 
Apathia said:
I had intended to persue my interest in Doron's "Universal Reasoning" or "Complementary Logic" in his thread at philosophy-forums.com. I was able to register there but unable to post. And now the philosophy-forums has vanished from the web.
Click to expand...
I noticed it is down. You should get a second email when your account is actually activated.

Apathia said:
Buried beneath Doron's landfill of missused and discarded mathematical terminology is an actual idea. Once it's made clear, then it can be discussed and critiqued in an intelligent way. It rarely comes to that because Doron's way of thinking is counterintuitive, as if from some culture isolated from the rest of the world.

[...]
Click to expand...
As put forward by you, it seems an idea that could be pursued and actually turned into mathematics - that's the goal, isn't it? And this wouldn't tear down the vast building of mathematics in order to replace it, but be an extra wing built onto it. However, I doubt that your analysis is right - for reasons put forward below, and because there's already precedent that your interpretation of Doron's work turned out not to be what he meant, in previous threads, despite your good efforts.

Apathia said:
If you get the idea, then there are a host of questions and critcisms that are not being addressed. I hope we can move on to these and not back to the years of forum wreckage and debacle Doron has behind him.
Click to expand...
"Wreckage" is, IMHO, put mildly. There's 5.5 years of Doron posting on numerous fora. On various fora, e.g., physicsforums.com, IIDB, and here, he met people who were inclined to meticulously point out the various errors in his mathematical reasoning and gradually grew tired with his not listening to their arguments. In that time, he's shown no inclination whatsoever to actually learn mathematics; instead, he's grown ever bolder in statements like "Cantor was wrong" up to his laughably incorrect rendering here of Cantor's diagonalization argument in the proof of the uncountability of R.

Would he honestly have some actual idea, and not only vague delusions, then methinks, he would have taken the effort to understand how mathematics works. He obviously hasn't. He doesn't know what an axiom is, how a definition looks like, etc., everything a freshman math student learns is alien to him. He doesn't take to heart criticism from others, but on questions posed in the best case regurgitates the same he's said before - in words or in links to earlier posts - or gives an answer that is even vaguer than what the question was about in the first place.

Would it be due to a lack of skill in English, then I honestly don't know what he's doing on English language boards. I note he's also active on haayal.co.il, a Hebrew-language board, and I obviously can't judge the clarity of his writings there, but I very much doubt it's better than his English writings - going on Skeptic's report of the wiki-discussion. And well, it's not that there's a lack of Hebrew-language highly-schooled mathematicians who could teach, coach or vet his work - apart from the questionable kindergarten teacher.

Apathia said:
It will be more interesting if we can get to questions that are relevant to the very different way Doron thinks.
Click to expand...
I'll gladly leave the floor to you to see if your interpretation of Doron's writings gets his approval.
 
Apathia said:
Now that we're in the Philosophy Section, I feel I can discuss Doron from a more general than mathematical angle.
Click to expand...


I truly wish you the best of luck in this, but I am concerned you have become involved in "facilitated communication."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom