Is atheism reason why I am getting rejected by the world?

[questfortruth]

Look, how I am forced to begin my paper on the proof of the most famous conjecture.
Is it normal, I mean I need to teach science good manners to get accepted.
It is the job of the Church, you know:

In this short note, I provide a proof for the Riemann Hypothesis. You are free
not to get enlightened about that fact.
But please pay respect to new dispositions of the Riemann Hypothesis and
research methods in this note.

If the reviewer does not agree that I have strictly
proved the Riemann hypothesis, the entire paper gets
rejected, along with the sections with which the
reviewer agrees. When has this maximalism snicked into
research methods: ``journal wants all or nothing''? Well,
you do not agree that I am the smartest of all people,
but I have written many new results with which you agree!
Why then reject everything?

 

[Rival]

No.

 

[ChristineM]

No

 

[Justanatheist]

Look, how I am forced to begin my paper on the proof of the most famous conjecture.
Is it normal, I mean I need to teach science good manners to get accepted.
It is the job of the Church, you know:

In this short note, I provide a proof for the Riemann Hypothesis. You are free
not to get enlightened about that fact.
But please pay respect to new dispositions of the Riemann Hypothesis and
research methods in this note.

If the reviewer does not agree that I have strictly
proved the Riemann hypothesis, the entire paper gets
rejected, along with the sections with which the
reviewer agrees. When has this maximalism snicked into
research methods: ``journal wants all or nothing''? Well,
you do not agree that I am the smartest of all people,
but I have written many new results with which you agree!
Why then reject everything?

What does this have to do with a lack of belief in gods?

 

[SkepticThinker]

Nope.

 

[Link]

@OP, you got to outsmart the devil and learn to dance in his world. Be smart.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

No.

 

[shunyadragon]

Look, how I am forced to begin my paper on the proof of the most famous conjecture.
Is it normal, I mean I need to teach science good manners to get accepted.
It is the job of the Church, you know:

In this short note, I provide a proof for the Riemann Hypothesis. You are free
not to get enlightened about that fact.
But please pay respect to new dispositions of the Riemann Hypothesis and
research methods in this note.

If the reviewer does not agree that I have strictly
proved the Riemann hypothesis, the entire paper gets
rejected, along with the sections with which the
reviewer agrees. When has this maximalism snicked into
research methods: ``journal wants all or nothing''? Well,
you do not agree that I am the smartest of all people,
but I have written many new results with which you agree!
Why then reject everything?

I see no solution for the Riemann hypothesis on your part, First a solution must be accepted by the Clay Mathematics Institute (CMI) in Oxford, England, with a million dollar prize. Not awarded yet.

A viable solution is apparently not yet a yes or no proposition. The closest is the work of Dr. Kumar Eswaran, a 74-year-old professor of Hyderabad’s Sreenidhi Institute of Science and Technology. His work has been accepted by some math experts, but not enough, and his work has been published, but rejected by some of the best journals.

Is your solution published at all in a recognized math journal?

The ability to solve the problem would be a matter of creative math abilities and not how 'smart' one is. Whatever it means to be 'smart!?!?!??'

The math world is indifferent to whether God or God(s) exist or not, and could care less whether one is a Theist, atheist nor agnostic. Nothing in any of the math journals of the world make any statement concerning religious beliefs.

I understand math enough to understand the problem, but no I could never be able to propose anything close to hint of a possible solution.

 

[Spirit of Light]

No.
If you are the one being rejeted time and time again, both from the same people or new people you show your paper too.

Maybe, only maybe you are the one who must think in a new way, maybe it is your own work that does not hold scientific standards they ask for.

Maybe they see the faults in your papers, but you do not see them?

 

[Jeremiah Ames]

Look, how I am forced to begin my paper on the proof of the most famous conjecture.
Is it normal, I mean I need to teach science good manners to get accepted.
It is the job of the Church, you know:

In this short note, I provide a proof for the Riemann Hypothesis. You are free
not to get enlightened about that fact.
But please pay respect to new dispositions of the Riemann Hypothesis and
research methods in this note.

If the reviewer does not agree that I have strictly
proved the Riemann hypothesis, the entire paper gets
rejected, along with the sections with which the
reviewer agrees. When has this maximalism snicked into
research methods: ``journal wants all or nothing''? Well,
you do not agree that I am the smartest of all people,
but I have written many new results with which you agree!
Why then reject everything?

i most assuredly am getting old

you lost me

 

[Brickjectivity]

Look, how I am forced to begin my paper on the proof of the most famous conjecture.
Is it normal, I mean I need to teach science good manners to get accepted.
It is the job of the Church, you know:

In this short note, I provide a proof for the Riemann Hypothesis. You are free
not to get enlightened about that fact.
But please pay respect to new dispositions of the Riemann Hypothesis and
research methods in this note.

If the reviewer does not agree that I have strictly
proved the Riemann hypothesis, the entire paper gets
rejected, along with the sections with which the
reviewer agrees. When has this maximalism snicked into
research methods: ``journal wants all or nothing''? Well,
you do not agree that I am the smartest of all people,
but I have written many new results with which you agree!
Why then reject everything?

What about a youtube video? Some people are publishing inventions that way.

 

[questfortruth]

Is your solution published at all in a recognized math journal?

No. But that is not my fault. I am getting strange answers over and over: "we must reject your paper because it is out the scope of our journal". Big fat lie.

What about a youtube video? Some people are publishing inventions that way.

I have zero visitors at my channel despite the interesting scientific content and my songs. I am
not popular at all. I have no "free money" to attract visitors.

 

[Spirit of Light]

No. But that is not my fault. I am getting strange answers over and over: "we must reject your paper because it is out the scope of our journal". Big fat lie.



I have zero visitors at my channel despite the interesting scientific content and my songs. I am
not popular at all. I have no "free money" to attract visitors.

Do you feel you have to be "popular" ?

 

[RabbiO]

I have zero visitors at my channel despite the interesting scientific content and my songs. I am
not popular at all. I have no "free money" to attract visitors.

The ego that fuels your delusions of adequacy needs to be reined in. Do you still insist that your ability to write in English is beyond reproach? Is it still your view that your posts on the forum and your papers which you have cited to reflect a total mastery of proper written English?

 

[sayak83]

I see no solution for the Riemann hypothesis on your part, First a solution must be accepted by the Clay Mathematics Institute (CMI) in Oxford, England, with a million dollar prize. Not awarded yet.

A viable solution is apparently not yet a yes or no proposition. The closest is the work of Dr. Kumar Eswaran, a 74-year-old professor of Hyderabad’s Sreenidhi Institute of Science and Technology. His work has been accepted by some math experts, but not enough, and his work has been published, but rejected by some of the best journals.

Is your solution published at all in a recognized math journal?

The ability to solve the problem would be a matter of creative math abilities and not how 'smart' one is. Whatever it means to be 'smart!?!?!??'

The math world is indifferent to whether God or God(s) exist or not, and could care less whether one is a Theist, atheist nor agnostic. Nothing in any of the math journals of the world make any statement concerning religious beliefs.

I understand math enough to understand the problem, but no I could never be able to propose anything close to hint of a possible solution.

I have the privilege to know Dr. K Eswaran. I do not know if the work is 100% correct, but he deserves a lot of recognition for his very serious and credible attempt.

 

[Yerda]

Look, how I am forced to begin my paper on the proof of the most famous conjecture.
Is it normal, I mean I need to teach science good manners to get accepted.
It is the job of the Church, you know:

In this short note, I provide a proof for the Riemann Hypothesis. You are free
not to get enlightened about that fact.
But please pay respect to new dispositions of the Riemann Hypothesis and
research methods in this note.

If the reviewer does not agree that I have strictly
proved the Riemann hypothesis, the entire paper gets
rejected, along with the sections with which the
reviewer agrees. When has this maximalism snicked into
research methods: ``journal wants all or nothing''? Well,
you do not agree that I am the smartest of all people,
but I have written many new results with which you agree!
Why then reject everything?

You were forced to begin a paper with snarky comments? Was it the sarcasmafia that forced you? Hell's Sassy Angels? The central irreverance agency? The people need to know.

 

[shunyadragon]

I have the privilege to know Dr. K Eswaran. I do not know if the work is 100% correct, but he deserves a lot of recognition for his very serious and credible attempt.

I agree, I know enough to understand the problem, but not the correctness of the solution.