Everyone in academia has, from time to time, received mails from people who make extraordinary claims. Recently, I received at least 2 emails from a person called Thierno M. Sow claiming:
The goal of [my paper] is to prove the ABC Conjecture, the Beal Conjecture, the Goldbach Conjecture, the Riemann Hypothesis and the Twin Primes Infinity.
Take a look at
the paper he sent me (and others) to see that he is, most likely, a disturbed individual. I am not a psychologist, but it is rather clear that this person suffers from some disorder. His paper contains "mathematics" and "chemistry" and claims to have solved some of the most difficult problems. All in 12 pages. Oh yes, it is also devoted to the memory of Nelson Mandela!
 |
| Page 1 of Sow's paper |
 |
| Page 11 of Sow's paper |
What exactly would be the problem with dedicating a piece of work to Nelson Mandela? It does not appear to be coined as an insult, although that might be suggested at first. I thought it fairly appropriate. Who knows whether the author happens to be deeply in gratitude to Nelson, it could be true for quite many?
ReplyDeleteNo one said there's a problem with dedicating a piece of work to Nelson Mandela, so you're attacking a strawman. The point is obviously about the IRRELEVANCE.
DeleteWhat exactly would be the problem with dedicating a piece of work to Nelson Mandela? It does not appear to be coined as an insult, although that might be suggested at first. I thought it fairly appropriate. Who knows whether the author happens to be deeply in gratitude to Nelson, it could be true for quite many?
ReplyDeleteWell, it is hilarious. Someone writes a completely idiotic, nonsensical, piece of crap and then he devotes it to Mandela. It's just funny. When the work carries no weight, the dedications to an important person do not make the work any better.
ReplyDelete(If Mandela was alive and if he had seen the idiocy of this paper, he would have been insulted to have his name associated to it.)
Do these morons actually believe the crap they write is "mathematics"?
ReplyDeleteIt looks like it. They take themselves very seriously.
ReplyDeleteHe does manage to use Latex quite well though. I especially liked the P = NP discussion on p3.
ReplyDeleteNot really. His use of LaTeX clearly indicates that he is someone who has no experience in writing mathematical papers. So, even at the LaTeX level, he fails miserably.
DeleteWhat I'm most impressed by is how lists a paper that he wrote in the references, with the word "Accepted" (and no clue as to where it was accepted) rather than the usual "Submitted".
ReplyDeleteThere's no chance in a billion that he can publish any of these funny things he's writing.
ReplyDelete