Richard,

I am not sure you meant what you said. You posted it as a response to my comment to Harv. It is possible that you miss read my response, thinking I referred to my creditability with those who understand math.

What I said was "Maybe he is doing it without thinking about it, but the only result is to damage my creditability with those who cannot follow the math and I am afraid I do not appreciate that very much."

Clearly if a person cannot follow the math, he must accept the opinions of others who do. When someone implies he has examined the math when he has not this is a great disservice to communication.

On the other hand, you may be asking the specific question: Why Are You Not Credible With Those Who Know Math?

That is because no one who knows math has ever taken the trouble to follow my math. They all think they know what I am doing and look to the conclusions first. As they do not find the conclusions creditable they have no interest in examining the math.

Believe it or not, I fully understand and sympathize with their position. The world is full of nuts and taking the time to examine the math of those who claim outlandish results is far too time consuming to be worth the effort. It is much easier to make a subtle error than it is to find that error.

However eventually, someday, someone who understands logic and thinks for themselves will actually take the trouble to look at it and they will realize that I have seen something very significant.

With regard to your attitude. You spend all your time trying to convince yourself that I have done nothing here while at the same time you totally avoid looking at the mathematics. Do you think that attitude is really uncommon in the academy? It is very rare for anyone to question authority, particularly if their livelihood is tied to the status of that authority.

Have fun -- Dick

• I look at your assumptions - yanniru - July 19, 2001 - 12:20 UTC