Hi Dick,
I must confess I was shocked both by your sudden appearance and by the content of your post. As one of your major supporters I felt I had to comment but didn't know what to say. Hope this doesn't offend you:
" What stopped my correspondence with Yanniru was when he convinced me that his understanding of mathematical physics was inadequate to the discussion "
Considering your persistence with Harv, whose understanding of physics is not much greater than a parrot's, the statement above sounds puzzling. Any mathematically-challenged person, such as Mario or yours truly, would find it very suspicious that you can sustain a long, frustrating debate with someone ignorant of physics and give up so easily when confronted with a professional like Yanniru. You may question his expertise, but the fact is no one here is more knowledgeable about the subject, except perhaps yourself.
" If you go back and look at his comments concerning the results of integration over product functions including the Dirac delta function, even you should be able to comprehend some of his failures. Most obvious was his confusion concerning indices on arguments. He clearly confuses the constraint that i is not equal to j to imply that x sub i is not equal to x sub j. These two statements have absolutely nothing to do with one another. "
It's easy to convince a layperson but, as you said it yourself, that means very little. I think what Mario, Harv, and others wanted to see was a knowledgeable person being convinced by your math. You may be right that Yanniru is wrong, but then again you may be wrong and we have no way to know the truth.
" Some of his other statements are just as asinine but, to understand why, you would need a better education in the application of the Dirac delta function and the consequences of integration over an expression including that function as a multiplicative factor. I left off from the argument with Yanniru for only one reason: the man is totally incompetent to discuss the mathematics in my presentation. "
In all honesty, and I tell you this as a friend, that sort of attitude is repugnant. Sorry for my sincerity, perhaps you think being uncivilized doesn't make one wrong, and you'd be right about that, but it certainly makes one's arguments uninteresting.
" That fact further indicates the level of mathematical comprehension on this forum and, without a decent understanding of mathematics, what I have done is totally beyond comprehension. Thus to try to explain any of it here is an out and out waste of time! "
I'm quite amazed you are capable of saying that, and in such a disdainful tone. If all there is to your work is meaningless number crunching, then no one is missing anything important anyway. I don't think your work is meaningless without the math, I found your paper impressive enough even before you write down your first equation. I wish more people could see what I saw in it, but you're certainly not helping the cause.
I don't know if you'll reply to this, but I'm sure you'll read it. I just hope you reflect on your attitude, and perhaps join the forum again to talk about all kinds of stuff. I for one miss your presence dearly.
Warm regards,
Aurino |