H wrote:
Like a magician he shows you those
cards so that you are focused on the cards on the table while switches the cards in his hands. He
starts off with reasonable concerns (e.g., the problems that skeptics always cite) and then abstracts away (i.e., switches the cards).


Specific points where that occurs?
short route to communicating would be:
Please, would you take a few minutes to illustrate what you mean about the structural integrity of that paper's logic by citing another paper (not already awarded some major prize, nor already published in a major off-line journal) which is at a similar level of abstraction (and length) and which you would cite as being, step for step, much more logical and more mathematically relevant in this world.
I would read each paper carefully and compare them point by point to see what you are saying.
'I would love to return to the forum thus enlightened.'

with a comfortable Brownian motionally,
Mike

• If you promise to stop using multiple user names - harvey1 - January 17, 2002 - 20:10 UTC
  • Here's a better one - harvey1 - January 17, 2002 - 20:25 UTC