|
|
|
|
|
by thraway180306
2842 days ago
|
|
What the parent charitably didn't stress is that this proof is the totality of mathematical work in this paper. The rest is a stream of words. As such it is a work of social science. It might even have been respectable in social science journal. Economists input a lot of assumptions into calculus 101 level equations and call that a "mathematical proof" of an economic theory. If the author wanted this to be a interdisciplinary discussion, why drag it into a mathematical journal where actual mathematical truths are published? Author says himself he was unable to formulate actual mathematical idea and recruited help. Why ask Tabachnikov, who is a geometer specializing in classical mechanics, instead of someone with like a clue about statistical modeling? He then compares his experience to one he had fighting in Vietnam... which only makes me wonder if that wasn't the point: to either succeed with a flag-planting diversion or be able to make that comparison and hero of himself anyways. |
|