questfortruth
Well-Known Member
Dear friends, is this correct? Grammar is correct?
1. My short CV and principles.
I am positively different from millions of non-prominent and unfamiliar
journal submitters. I have completed secondary school with the Gold Medal,
Tartu University with Cum Laude, and I have successfully published in Physical
Review E and European Physical Journal B. Presented are short clear proofs of
the conjectures from Number Theory, waiting at my home office to be published
by you!
If somebody (including me) has convinced me of having made a mistake, I repent
and will try to correct the mistake. But I cannot correct a mistake, just
because somebody has seemingly joked in saying that I have made a mistake
there. Writing to me rejection letters like ``we have no time to read your
paper because you are not the only submitter [and you are not a Professor];
and it seems that it requires considerable effort and meditation to understand
your approach to the conjecture'' is not acceptable at all as a flaw! Please
look at the type of mistake demonstration I would accept:
If I would write in a paper: ``2=5+7'', then the editor would find that place
and reply: ``2=5+7 does not hold''.
2. I have no authority to tell you that but drop your shields of distrust!
In the reading process, the brain does mental activity and dwells on what was
read. A new web of connections in brain cells should have the time to form
and rights to be emerging.
Scientific trust, curiosity, and interest are necessary to be in origin
because the instinctual defense mechanism of the brain [called ``skepticism'']
does not allow new ``software'' to be ``installed'' in the deep, operational tissue.
This defense is necessary, because malware (or defective software) if installed,
will harm the consistency of the system. The authors of mental malware are called
``intellectual terrorists''. However, reading an original scientific paper is a complicated
learning process. I have very new material, so you should learn; thus, it is normal
to feel unease and even tingle.
1. My short CV and principles.
I am positively different from millions of non-prominent and unfamiliar
journal submitters. I have completed secondary school with the Gold Medal,
Tartu University with Cum Laude, and I have successfully published in Physical
Review E and European Physical Journal B. Presented are short clear proofs of
the conjectures from Number Theory, waiting at my home office to be published
by you!
If somebody (including me) has convinced me of having made a mistake, I repent
and will try to correct the mistake. But I cannot correct a mistake, just
because somebody has seemingly joked in saying that I have made a mistake
there. Writing to me rejection letters like ``we have no time to read your
paper because you are not the only submitter [and you are not a Professor];
and it seems that it requires considerable effort and meditation to understand
your approach to the conjecture'' is not acceptable at all as a flaw! Please
look at the type of mistake demonstration I would accept:
If I would write in a paper: ``2=5+7'', then the editor would find that place
and reply: ``2=5+7 does not hold''.
2. I have no authority to tell you that but drop your shields of distrust!
In the reading process, the brain does mental activity and dwells on what was
read. A new web of connections in brain cells should have the time to form
and rights to be emerging.
Scientific trust, curiosity, and interest are necessary to be in origin
because the instinctual defense mechanism of the brain [called ``skepticism'']
does not allow new ``software'' to be ``installed'' in the deep, operational tissue.
This defense is necessary, because malware (or defective software) if installed,
will harm the consistency of the system. The authors of mental malware are called
``intellectual terrorists''. However, reading an original scientific paper is a complicated
learning process. I have very new material, so you should learn; thus, it is normal
to feel unease and even tingle.
Last edited: