| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"galathaea" |
| Date: |
11 Apr 2007 02:25:45 PM |
| Object: |
the male alpha problem in math and the sciences |
i have regularly found
that men tend to disbelieve me
if i discuss something they are unfamiliar with
when i was younger
i was often ashamed by their accusations
and would keep quiet after any "incident" where i was ridiculed
later
as i learned more and often found more credence in whatever it was
discussed
i realised my initial reactions were not constructive
and i needed to be more forceful about what i knew
the way men and women handle such situations is very different
and i suspect that this is one of the larger selection criteria
that keeps women out of math and sciences
the problem with these fields
in opposition to others
is that there seems to be some tradition of certainty here
math is considered true absolutely by a large segment of practitoners
( in whatever definition of truth they have rationalised )
science is considered to reveal the truth of nature
whether foundationally justified or not
these fields seem to attract the type that seek certainty
so when something is presented outside their knowledge
when they are confronted with a different approach or view
they regularly and immediately assume it is invalid
i have seen this regularly in my life
and it seems to have an added twist for women
for women
the assumption of wrongness seems accompanied with a
" she's alright, she's just a little confused, i'll come and correct
her "
attitude
almost an embarassment followed by rescuer fantasy
and then when source material is presented to provide a foundation for
the claims
others who may be aware of some of the source come in
_and_will_try_to_mediate_by_supporting_the_male_attacks_!
" well she's got some points here
but she's still wrong xyz "
and i find i haven't made any progress because the points are then
ignored
and the original assertion must still be defended
grigory perelman took exception to this behavior
by his peers in russia
who often mocked him for believing (correctly) to have proven
poincare's conjecture
but of course the prototypical example is rosalind franklin
whose ideas were mocked
whose appearance was mocked
by watson and crick after stealing her data and claiming her results
on the structure of DNA
do other women in these fields find the same behavior?
did it almost turn you away from the fields?
i've had professors tell me i was mistaken for thinking there was such
a thing as
noncommutative geometry
( " all spaces have commutative function spaces! " )
mocked for considering bohmian mechanics by a physics professor
who would regularly show me the new advances they were making
in extending aspect's results
berated for suggesting quantum logic solutions to homework problems
once
when i mentioned to an ex professor
that i had hypergeometric results which might be new
the professor told me
" I am sure you have worked hard on your little theorem. But the
literature
is vast, and even on the off chance you haven't any obvious
errors, the
result is probably known. You should find a professor doing
original
research and they can help you get started if that's what you
want. "
this was a professor who
was the putnam coach the year i scored highest in my state
worked in combinatorial sums and could easily have understood
refused to even look at my work
lately on these newgroups
steve carlip
whom i had always thought provided well-thought out responses
wrote:
" If you want to work on Bohmian mechanics as a program that
*might* eventually lead to a deterministic alternative to QFT,
that's fine (though be careful of your citations -- a number of
the QFT models you've referred to are explicitly *not*
deterministic).
But don't confuse your hopes with what has actually been shown
to be possible. "
did carlip know enough of bohmian mechanics to make this assertion?
of course not
like most posters in the thread
he only started reading the literature after i posted links to it
and his negativity carried the assumption that i
_who_had_posted_the_links_and_responses_that_introduced_him_to_it_
had no clue what i was talking about
i've been called crazy
because i discussed artemov's logic of proofs
as a resolution to the bhk semantics of constructivism
by people who had not read the papers
do other women find they continually have to justify themselves to
men?
is this a truly sexually dimorphic problem?
or am i not able to generalise this because of "special" circumstances
in my cases?
i am just wondering how others deal with this
( the guys can answer too
if they promise to take a shower and brush their teeth )
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar
.
|
|
| User: "T Wake" |
|
| Title: Re: I'm so proud of Mr. NonSense, a.k.a. Mr. Einstein_Hoax. |
24 Apr 2007 02:13:22 PM |
|
|
"Jeff.Relf" <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_2007_Apr_23_9_@Cotse.NET...
I always feel a tinge of pride when I see the mentally handicapped
muster all their energy to peck out the word " idiot "
as they gaze in the mirror.
Another IKWYABWAI from Relf.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: I'm so proud of Mr. NonSense, a.k.a. Mr. Einstein_Hoax. |
23 Apr 2007 10:42:23 PM |
|
|
Jeff…Relf wrote:
I always feel a tinge of pride when I see the mentally handicapped
muster all their energy to peck out the word " idiot "
as they gaze in the mirror.
We know how much pride you take in your work.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: the male alpha problem in math and the sciences |
20 Apr 2007 11:19:34 AM |
|
|
In article <20513$4628d808$4fe7353$2707@DIALUPUSA.NET>, "nonsense@unsettled.com" <nonsense@unsettled.com> writes:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
snip
In their zeal to prove that girls can do math, female(mostly)
teachers are dumbing down the boys so that the girls look
like they do math better. This is happening in elementary
schools. I haven't yet heard of it happening in high schools,
but it will.
Take a look at the recent Virgina massacre through this
prism.
Kids in western civilized nations have been being taught
passivity, for generations, as the correct response to
aggression.
In a room with more than 31 people in it, they stood
around and allowed themselves to be killed one by one.
It appears, from all I've heard to date, that *nobody*
attacked the killer. Nobody had the nerve to stand up
to him. Nobody decided to rush the guy. I suppose they
were waiting for a teacher to come along and take care
of the problem for them, as they'd been taught to do
since kindergarten.
That overlong "jihad" thread that finished not so long
ago demonstrated the mindset of the bulk of the people,
most of whom are sheep. This has been taught, with an
every growing emphasis, to every generation going
through western schools since the end of WW2.
Yes, *exactly*.
Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "galathaea" |
|
| Title: Re: the male alpha problem in math and the sciences |
21 Apr 2007 04:11:29 PM |
|
|
On Apr 20, 8:11 am, "nonse...@unsettled.com" <nonse...@unsettled.com>
wrote:
jmfbah...@aol.com wrote:
snip
In their zeal to prove that girls can do math, female(mostly)
teachers are dumbing down the boys so that the girls look
like they do math better. This is happening in elementary
schools. I haven't yet heard of it happening in high schools,
but it will.
Take a look at the recent Virgina massacre through this
prism.
Kids in western civilized nations have been being taught
passivity, for generations, as the correct response to
aggression.
In a room with more than 31 people in it, they stood
around and allowed themselves to be killed one by one.
It appears, from all I've heard to date, that *nobody*
attacked the killer. Nobody had the nerve to stand up
to him. Nobody decided to rush the guy. I suppose they
were waiting for a teacher to come along and take care
of the problem for them, as they'd been taught to do
since kindergarten.
That overlong "jihad" thread that finished not so long
ago demonstrated the mindset of the bulk of the people,
most of whom are sheep. This has been taught, with an
every growing emphasis, to every generation going
through western schools since the end of WW2.
it is a very strange prism indeed
to view this chorus of blame-the-victims
this chorus of
" after a massacre of this proportions
we are obviously living in a society
with too little aggression and violence "
the sheep are more often the conservative
the followers and toadies
unable to think for themselves
look to traditional authority
defense should be taught at a young age
but a mental health defense
one that avoids shutdown mechanisms
fetal position self-miseries
in physically challenging situations
or insidious exploitations by mental aggressors
in situations that require careful thought
how to think for oneself
and not be afraid of new information
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob Cain" |
|
| Title: Re: the male alpha problem in math and the sciences |
22 Apr 2007 01:38:29 AM |
|
|
galathaea wrote:
it is a very strange prism indeed
to view this chorus of blame-the-victims
this chorus of
" after a massacre of this proportions
we are obviously living in a society
with too little aggression and violence "
the sheep are more often the conservative
the followers and toadies
unable to think for themselves
look to traditional authority
defense should be taught at a young age
but a mental health defense
one that avoids shutdown mechanisms
fetal position self-miseries
in physically challenging situations
or insidious exploitations by mental aggressors
in situations that require careful thought
how to think for oneself
and not be afraid of new information
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar
Your poor imitation of e.e. cummings is very difficult to read. What
do you find objectionable about the style and form our eyes have been
trained on?
Bob
--
"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no simpler."
A. Einstein
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: the male alpha problem in math and the sciences |
21 Apr 2007 05:45:50 PM |
|
|
galathaea wrote:
On Apr 20, 8:11 am, "nonse...@unsettled.com" <nonse...@unsettled.com>
wrote:
jmfbah...@aol.com wrote:
snip
In their zeal to prove that girls can do math, female(mostly)
teachers are dumbing down the boys so that the girls look
like they do math better. This is happening in elementary
schools. I haven't yet heard of it happening in high schools,
but it will.
Take a look at the recent Virgina massacre through this
prism.
Kids in western civilized nations have been being taught
passivity, for generations, as the correct response to
aggression.
In a room with more than 31 people in it, they stood
around and allowed themselves to be killed one by one.
It appears, from all I've heard to date, that *nobody*
attacked the killer. Nobody had the nerve to stand up
to him. Nobody decided to rush the guy. I suppose they
were waiting for a teacher to come along and take care
of the problem for them, as they'd been taught to do
since kindergarten.
That overlong "jihad" thread that finished not so long
ago demonstrated the mindset of the bulk of the people,
most of whom are sheep. This has been taught, with an
every growing emphasis, to every generation going
through western schools since the end of WW2.
it is a very strange prism indeed
to view this chorus of blame-the-victims
Has anyone ever told you how much of an idiot you are?
snip
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "galathaea" |
|
| Title: Re: the male alpha problem in math and the sciences |
13 Apr 2007 12:28:12 PM |
|
|
On Apr 11, 8:27 pm, "Tonico" <Tonic...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 12 abr, 03:29, "Jesse F. Hughes" <j...@phiwumbda.org> wrote:> Rick Decker <rdec...@hamilton.edu> writes:
galathaea wrote:
i have regularly found
that men tend to disbelieve me
if i discuss something they are unfamiliar with
I doubt that.
Not me. I am very familiar with the fact that galathaea makes dubious
claims. Consequently, I believe them.
***************************************************
Correction (if you please): she makes dubious, twisted, very weird,
terribly written and dismayingly long dubious facts.
I stopped reading her posts long ago, but I must admit that the alpha
male stuff caught my attention. Nothing better, at least for her,
apparently, than claiming some kind of rather odd sexist stuff in
science in order to justify her own failures. If you can mix this with
claims of having opposed a rather stupid law about languages in which
people can deal in their own businesses then better than better.
hello everyone
in case you don't know toni(c)o
he is the type of person who recently posted
that a mathematician's paper had been long disproved
and made claims on who had made the disproof and when
except that the entire incident never happened
he was using it to dismiss fernando revilla's work on goldbach
and stated his claims as if they were a warning to others
but it never happened
in fact
most that have followed revilla's claims
are quite aware of the history
because it is posted on usenet and archived
and regularly updated with questions and responses
so
did toni(c)o desire something so badly
that he influenced his own recollections
in the classic avoidance mechanisms
that cognitive dissonance allows?
or was his dishonesty intentioned
as a much more maladaptive pathology to scare away
something he did not want to have to deal with?
anyways
everyone meet toni(c)o
his reputation precedes him and is fully archived
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tonico" |
|
| Title: Re: the male alpha problem in math and the sciences |
13 Apr 2007 12:44:12 PM |
|
|
On Apr 13, 8:28 pm, "galathaea" <galath...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Apr 11, 8:27 pm, "Tonico" <Tonic...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 12 abr, 03:29, "Jesse F. Hughes" <j...@phiwumbda.org> wrote:> Rick Decker <rdec...@hamilton.edu> writes:
galathaea wrote:
i have regularly found
that men tend to disbelieve me
if i discuss something they are unfamiliar with
I doubt that.
Not me. I am very familiar with the fact that galathaea makes dubious
claims. Consequently, I believe them.
***************************************************
Correction (if you please): she makes dubious, twisted, very weird,
terribly written and dismayingly long dubious facts.
I stopped reading her posts long ago, but I must admit that the alpha
male stuff caught my attention. Nothing better, at least for her,
apparently, than claiming some kind of rather odd sexist stuff in
science in order to justify her own failures. If you can mix this with
claims of having opposed a rather stupid law about languages in which
people can deal in their own businesses then better than better.
hello everyone
in case you don't know toni(c)o
he is the type of person who recently posted
that a mathematician's paper had been long disproved
and made claims on who had made the disproof and when
except that the entire incident never happened
he was using it to dismiss fernando revilla's work on goldbach
and stated his claims as if they were a warning to others
but it never happened
in fact
most that have followed revilla's claims
are quite aware of the history
because it is posted on usenet and archived
and regularly updated with questions and responses
so
did toni(c)o desire something so badly
that he influenced his own recollections
in the classic avoidance mechanisms
that cognitive dissonance allows?
or was his dishonesty intentioned
as a much more maladaptive pathology to scare away
something he did not want to have to deal with?
anyways
everyone meet toni(c)o
his reputation precedes him and is fully archived
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar--
***************************************************
Indeed a liar you are, Galathea...and a bitter one, apparently.
Please do quote my post(s) where I claimed that some paper (which
one?) had already been disproved (by whom? How can I possibly know
stuff like this??).
I don't like the way Fernando posted his "proof", since both the
language and the way he defines and uses stuff doesn't seem proper to
me.
As for the validity of his paper I can't say: three times I've already
began to read it and I had to stop in the third page (my personal
best) because it is extremely difficult for me to follow all that mess
(at least a mess for me) in that paper. Perhaps it is just my own lack
of talent to understand that stuff, but I'm a professional
mathematician, I've read papers, and I have some expectations about
how a paper must look.
It was proposed to Fernando to send his paper to a peer reviewed
journal, and for some reason that I still cannot fully point at he
refuses to do so.
Ok, so perhaps he has a proof, and perhaps he has not one: I can't
say.
So please: be nice to the NG and post my messages where I claim that
Fernando's paper had long been refused. Perhaps I already forgot that
part of my life.
I bet that as a poor, attacked by alpha males, suffering woman you are
careful enough to back up your claims...right, fab(u)list? :>)
Tonio
.
|
|
|
| User: "galathaea" |
|
| Title: Re: the male alpha problem in math and the sciences |
13 Apr 2007 01:09:39 PM |
|
|
On Apr 13, 10:44 am, "Tonico" <Tonic...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Apr 13, 8:28 pm, "galathaea" <galath...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Apr 11, 8:27 pm, "Tonico" <Tonic...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 12 abr, 03:29, "Jesse F. Hughes" <j...@phiwumbda.org> wrote:> Rick Decker <rdec...@hamilton.edu> writes:
galathaea wrote:
i have regularly found
that men tend to disbelieve me
if i discuss something they are unfamiliar with
I doubt that.
Not me. I am very familiar with the fact that galathaea makes dubious
claims. Consequently, I believe them.
***************************************************
Correction (if you please): she makes dubious, twisted, very weird,
terribly written and dismayingly long dubious facts.
I stopped reading her posts long ago, but I must admit that the alpha
male stuff caught my attention. Nothing better, at least for her,
apparently, than claiming some kind of rather odd sexist stuff in
science in order to justify her own failures. If you can mix this with
claims of having opposed a rather stupid law about languages in which
people can deal in their own businesses then better than better.
hello everyone
in case you don't know toni(c)o
he is the type of person who recently posted
that a mathematician's paper had been long disproved
and made claims on who had made the disproof and when
except that the entire incident never happened
he was using it to dismiss fernando revilla's work on goldbach
and stated his claims as if they were a warning to others
but it never happened
in fact
most that have followed revilla's claims
are quite aware of the history
because it is posted on usenet and archived
and regularly updated with questions and responses
so
did toni(c)o desire something so badly
that he influenced his own recollections
in the classic avoidance mechanisms
that cognitive dissonance allows?
or was his dishonesty intentioned
as a much more maladaptive pathology to scare away
something he did not want to have to deal with?
anyways
everyone meet toni(c)o
his reputation precedes him and is fully archived
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar--
***************************************************
Indeed a liar you are, Galathea...and a bitter one, apparently.
Please do quote my post(s) where I claimed that some paper (which
one?) had already been disproved (by whom? How can I possibly know
stuff like this??).
I don't like the way Fernando posted his "proof", since both the
language and the way he defines and uses stuff doesn't seem proper to
me.
As for the validity of his paper I can't say: three times I've already
began to read it and I had to stop in the third page (my personal
best) because it is extremely difficult for me to follow all that mess
(at least a mess for me) in that paper. Perhaps it is just my own lack
of talent to understand that stuff, but I'm a professional
mathematician, I've read papers, and I have some expectations about
how a paper must look.
It was proposed to Fernando to send his paper to a peer reviewed
journal, and for some reason that I still cannot fully point at he
refuses to do so.
Ok, so perhaps he has a proof, and perhaps he has not one: I can't
say.
So please: be nice to the NG and post my messages where I claim that
Fernando's paper had long been refused. Perhaps I already forgot that
part of my life.
I bet that as a poor, attacked by alpha males, suffering woman you are
careful enough to back up your claims...right, fab(u)list? :>)
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/msg/8cadcb987a2d8171?hl=en&
your avoidance mechanism
is really screwing your mind
but you are another in a long line of perfect examples
of the point of this thread
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tonico" |
|
| Title: Re: the male alpha problem in math and the sciences |
13 Apr 2007 01:46:05 PM |
|
|
On Apr 13, 9:09 pm, "galathaea" <galath...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Apr 13, 10:44 am, "Tonico" <Tonic...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Apr 13, 8:28 pm, "galathaea" <galath...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Apr 11, 8:27 pm, "Tonico" <Tonic...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 12 abr, 03:29, "Jesse F. Hughes" <j...@phiwumbda.org> wrote:> Rick Decker <rdec...@hamilton.edu> writes:
galathaea wrote:
i have regularly found
that men tend to disbelieve me
if i discuss something they are unfamiliar with
I doubt that.
Not me. I am very familiar with the fact that galathaea makes dubious
claims. Consequently, I believe them.
***************************************************
Correction (if you please): she makes dubious, twisted, very weird,
terribly written and dismayingly long dubious facts.
I stopped reading her posts long ago, but I must admit that the alpha
male stuff caught my attention. Nothing better, at least for her,
apparently, than claiming some kind of rather odd sexist stuff in
science in order to justify her own failures. If you can mix this with
claims of having opposed a rather stupid law about languages in which
people can deal in their own businesses then better than better.
hello everyone
in case you don't know toni(c)o
he is the type of person who recently posted
that a mathematician's paper had been long disproved
and made claims on who had made the disproof and when
except that the entire incident never happened
he was using it to dismiss fernando revilla's work on goldbach
and stated his claims as if they were a warning to others
but it never happened
in fact
most that have followed revilla's claims
are quite aware of the history
because it is posted on usenet and archived
and regularly updated with questions and responses
so
did toni(c)o desire something so badly
that he influenced his own recollections
in the classic avoidance mechanisms
that cognitive dissonance allows?
or was his dishonesty intentioned
as a much more maladaptive pathology to scare away
something he did not want to have to deal with?
anyways
everyone meet toni(c)o
his reputation precedes him and is fully archived
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar--
***************************************************
Indeed a liar you are, Galathea...and a bitter one, apparently.
Please do quote my post(s) where I claimed that some paper (which
one?) had already been disproved (by whom? How can I possibly know
stuff like this??).
I don't like the way Fernando posted his "proof", since both the
language and the way he defines and uses stuff doesn't seem proper to
me.
As for the validity of his paper I can't say: three times I've already
began to read it and I had to stop in the third page (my personal
best) because it is extremely difficult for me to follow all that mess
(at least a mess for me) in that paper. Perhaps it is just my own lack
of talent to understand that stuff, but I'm a professional
mathematician, I've read papers, and I have some expectations about
how a paper must look.
It was proposed to Fernando to send his paper to a peer reviewed
journal, and for some reason that I still cannot fully point at he
refuses to do so.
Ok, so perhaps he has a proof, and perhaps he has not one: I can't
say.
So please: be nice to the NG and post my messages where I claim that
Fernando's paper had long been refused. Perhaps I already forgot that
part of my life.
I bet that as a poor, attacked by alpha males, suffering woman you are
careful enough to back up your claims...right, fab(u)list? :>)
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/msg/8cadcb987a2d8171?hl=en&
your avoidance mechanism
is really screwing your mind
but you are another in a long line of perfect examples
of the point of this thread
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar
***************************************************
No wonder you feel yourself attacked and a poor thing: you are such.
In that post of above I write perfectly clear, and I past from the
very link:
"...but I seem to remember that R. Chapman or A. Magidin
(I can't be 100% sure) did point out some mistake(s) the first time
you came up with the announcement of your GC's proof some few months
ago."
I wonder what part of that feeble, obviously histery-raged, mind of
yours didn't allow you, Gala dear, to understand the "seem to
remember" and the "can't be 100% sure" parts.
Apparently, and this is ONLY apparently, I didn't remember correctly,
but that is unimportant in that post of mind: the gist of my point to
Fernando was, as I ALREADY told you in my past message of around 1
hour ago, and you purposedly are dodging this, that he should send
his paper to a peer reviewed journal, as it is clearly written in
that post, and I past again:
"Anyway, the gist of my message is still valid, imo: whether there
were
(are) flaws in your paper or not, it'll be generally accepted by the
mathematical community only if it appears in some peer-reviewed
journal".
So what's next, my dearest full-of-complexes, liar omega-female?
Regards
Tonio
.
|
|
|
| User: "galathaea" |
|
| Title: Re: the male alpha problem in math and the sciences |
13 Apr 2007 02:04:05 PM |
|
|
On Apr 13, 11:46 am, "Tonico" <Tonic...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Apr 13, 9:09 pm, "galathaea" <galath...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Apr 13, 10:44 am, "Tonico" <Tonic...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Apr 13, 8:28 pm, "galathaea" <galath...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Apr 11, 8:27 pm, "Tonico" <Tonic...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 12 abr, 03:29, "Jesse F. Hughes" <j...@phiwumbda.org> wrote:> Rick Decker <rdec...@hamilton.edu> writes:
galathaea wrote:
i have regularly found
that men tend to disbelieve me
if i discuss something they are unfamiliar with
I doubt that.
Not me. I am very familiar with the fact that galathaea makes dubious
claims. Consequently, I believe them.
***************************************************
Correction (if you please): she makes dubious, twisted, very weird,
terribly written and dismayingly long dubious facts.
I stopped reading her posts long ago, but I must admit that the alpha
male stuff caught my attention. Nothing better, at least for her,
apparently, than claiming some kind of rather odd sexist stuff in
science in order to justify her own failures. If you can mix this with
claims of having opposed a rather stupid law about languages in which
people can deal in their own businesses then better than better.
hello everyone
in case you don't know toni(c)o
he is the type of person who recently posted
that a mathematician's paper had been long disproved
and made claims on who had made the disproof and when
except that the entire incident never happened
he was using it to dismiss fernando revilla's work on goldbach
and stated his claims as if they were a warning to others
but it never happened
in fact
most that have followed revilla's claims
are quite aware of the history
because it is posted on usenet and archived
and regularly updated with questions and responses
so
did toni(c)o desire something so badly
that he influenced his own recollections
in the classic avoidance mechanisms
that cognitive dissonance allows?
or was his dishonesty intentioned
as a much more maladaptive pathology to scare away
something he did not want to have to deal with?
anyways
everyone meet toni(c)o
his reputation precedes him and is fully archived
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar--
***************************************************
Indeed a liar you are, Galathea...and a bitter one, apparently.
Please do quote my post(s) where I claimed that some paper (which
one?) had already been disproved (by whom? How can I possibly know
stuff like this??).
I don't like the way Fernando posted his "proof", since both the
language and the way he defines and uses stuff doesn't seem proper to
me.
As for the validity of his paper I can't say: three times I've already
began to read it and I had to stop in the third page (my personal
best) because it is extremely difficult for me to follow all that mess
(at least a mess for me) in that paper. Perhaps it is just my own lack
of talent to understand that stuff, but I'm a professional
mathematician, I've read papers, and I have some expectations about
how a paper must look.
It was proposed to Fernando to send his paper to a peer reviewed
journal, and for some reason that I still cannot fully point at he
refuses to do so.
Ok, so perhaps he has a proof, and perhaps he has not one: I can't
say.
So please: be nice to the NG and post my messages where I claim that
Fernando's paper had long been refused. Perhaps I already forgot that
part of my life.
I bet that as a poor, attacked by alpha males, suffering woman you are
careful enough to back up your claims...right, fab(u)list? :>)
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/msg/8cadcb987a2d8171?hl=en&
your avoidance mechanism
is really screwing your mind
but you are another in a long line of perfect examples
of the point of this thread
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar
***************************************************
No wonder you feel yourself attacked and a poor thing: you are such.
In that post of above I write perfectly clear, and I past from the
very link:
"...but I seem to remember that R. Chapman or A. Magidin
(I can't be 100% sure) did point out some mistake(s) the first time
you came up with the announcement of your GC's proof some few months
ago."
I wonder what part of that feeble, obviously histery-raged, mind of
yours didn't allow you, Gala dear, to understand the "seem to
remember" and the "can't be 100% sure" parts.
Apparently, and this is ONLY apparently, I didn't remember correctly,
but that is unimportant in that post of mind: the gist of my point to
Fernando was, as I ALREADY told you in my past message of around 1
hour ago, and you purposedly are dodging this, that he should send
his paper to a peer reviewed journal, as it is clearly written in
that post, and I past again:
"Anyway, the gist of my message is still valid, imo: whether there
were
(are) flaws in your paper or not, it'll be generally accepted by the
mathematical community only if it appears in some peer-reviewed
journal".
So what's next, my dearest full-of-complexes, liar omega-female?
in the first post
you were blatantly stating there were errors
when he called you on it
you were:
" uhh i don't know, someone did it, ii think "
keep defending it though
you are making my point very well
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tonico" |
|
| Title: Re: the male alpha problem in math and the sciences |
13 Apr 2007 02:11:52 PM |
|
|
On Apr 13, 10:04 pm, "galathaea" <galath...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Apr 13, 11:46 am, "Tonico" <Tonic...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Apr 13, 9:09 pm, "galathaea" <galath...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Apr 13, 10:44 am, "Tonico" <Tonic...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Apr 13, 8:28 pm, "galathaea" <galath...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Apr 11, 8:27 pm, "Tonico" <Tonic...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 12 abr, 03:29, "Jesse F. Hughes" <j...@phiwumbda.org> wrote:> Rick Decker <rdec...@hamilton.edu> writes:
galathaea wrote:
i have regularly found
that men tend to disbelieve me
if i discuss something they are unfamiliar with
I doubt that.
Not me. I am very familiar with the fact that galathaea makes dubious
claims. Consequently, I believe them.
***************************************************
Correction (if you please): she makes dubious, twisted, very weird,
terribly written and dismayingly long dubious facts.
I stopped reading her posts long ago, but I must admit that the alpha
male stuff caught my attention. Nothing better, at least for her,
apparently, than claiming some kind of rather odd sexist stuff in
science in order to justify her own failures. If you can mix this with
claims of having opposed a rather stupid law about languages in which
people can deal in their own businesses then better than better.
hello everyone
in case you don't know toni(c)o
he is the type of person who recently posted
that a mathematician's paper had been long disproved
and made claims on who had made the disproof and when
except that the entire incident never happened
he was using it to dismiss fernando revilla's work on goldbach
and stated his claims as if they were a warning to others
but it never happened
in fact
most that have followed revilla's claims
are quite aware of the history
because it is posted on usenet and archived
and regularly updated with questions and responses
so
did toni(c)o desire something so badly
that he influenced his own recollections
in the classic avoidance mechanisms
that cognitive dissonance allows?
or was his dishonesty intentioned
as a much more maladaptive pathology to scare away
something he did not want to have to deal with?
anyways
everyone meet toni(c)o
his reputation precedes him and is fully archived
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar--
***************************************************
Indeed a liar you are, Galathea...and a bitter one, apparently.
Please do quote my post(s) where I claimed that some paper (which
one?) had already been disproved (by whom? How can I possibly know
stuff like this??).
I don't like the way Fernando posted his "proof", since both the
language and the way he defines and uses stuff doesn't seem proper to
me.
As for the validity of his paper I can't say: three times I've already
began to read it and I had to stop in the third page (my personal
best) because it is extremely difficult for me to follow all that mess
(at least a mess for me) in that paper. Perhaps it is just my own lack
of talent to understand that stuff, but I'm a professional
mathematician, I've read papers, and I have some expectations about
how a paper must look.
It was proposed to Fernando to send his paper to a peer reviewed
journal, and for some reason that I still cannot fully point at he
refuses to do so.
Ok, so perhaps he has a proof, and perhaps he has not one: I can't
say.
So please: be nice to the NG and post my messages where I claim that
Fernando's paper had long been refused. Perhaps I already forgot that
part of my life.
I bet that as a poor, attacked by alpha males, suffering woman you are
careful enough to back up your claims...right, fab(u)list? :>)
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/msg/8cadcb987a2d8171?hl=en&
your avoidance mechanism
is really screwing your mind
but you are another in a long line of perfect examples
of the point of this thread
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar
***************************************************
No wonder you feel yourself attacked and a poor thing: you are such.
In that post of above I write perfectly clear, and I past from the
very link:
"...but I seem to remember that R. Chapman or A. Magidin
(I can't be 100% sure) did point out some mistake(s) the first time
you came up with the announcement of your GC's proof some few months
ago."
I wonder what part of that feeble, obviously histery-raged, mind of
yours didn't allow you, Gala dear, to understand the "seem to
remember" and the "can't be 100% sure" parts.
Apparently, and this is ONLY apparently, I didn't remember correctly,
but that is unimportant in that post of mind: the gist of my point to
Fernando was, as I ALREADY told you in my past message of around 1
hour ago, and you purposedly are dodging this, that he should send
his paper to a peer reviewed journal, as it is clearly written in
that post, and I past again:
"Anyway, the gist of my message is still valid, imo: whether there
were
(are) flaws in your paper or not, it'll be generally accepted by the
mathematical community only if it appears in some peer-reviewed
journal".
So what's next, my dearest full-of-complexes, liar omega-female?
in the first post
you were blatantly stating there were errors
when he called you on it
you were:
" uhh i don't know, someone did it, ii think "
keep defending it though
you are making my point very well
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar-
******************************************
Well, being a liar and a fablist [sic], as you witness about yourself,
can surely feel cozy to attack others. I supose that is a reaction
against those terrible alpha males you've suffered so bad from?
Oh well...enjoy.
There were inaccuracies fixed in that paper: I, for one, already told
him (Fernando, and way before that post your quoted) that to include
into a definition of something another thing that has NOT already be
defined
is. to say thye least, pretty weird and may confuse. That very thing
STILL exists in the paper, at least as how it was some 2 weeks ago.
I guess things like the above were that made that paper so hard to
read for me, until I left it aside.
Anyway, that was NOT my point, as already noted by me, both in my last
post here, and in that link you posted....and you insist in dodging
that.
Regards, liar.
Tonio
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "boson boss" |
|
| Title: Re: the male alpha problem in math and the sciences |
12 Apr 2007 05:39:30 AM |
|
|
On Apr 11, 9:25 pm, "galathaea" <galath...@gmail.com> wrote:
i have regularly found
that men tend to disbelieve me
if i discuss something they are unfamiliar with
when i was younger
i was often ashamed by their accusations
and would keep quiet after any "incident" where i was ridiculed
I understand and you're right. I know this by reacting from a flushing-
cheek perspective, but also by sensing different mind operations
within a dynamics. The objective world in my opinion is processed
differently and reasoning is sound, but maybe not of same sound :-))
Also, I think some statistics hit women as they are already placed to
receive their "place". Oh dear... I won't delete it.
later
as i learned more and often found more credence in whatever it was
discussed
i realised my initial reactions were not constructive
and i needed to be more forceful about what i knew
Well, right. You have to emanate some influence. Only in general,
since this is communication etc, I'd not put it like going against a
Mass. It would be already a specific drama instead of whole spectrum.
the way men and women handle such situations is very different
and i suspect that this is one of the larger selection criteria
that keeps women out of math and sciences
Plenty of women in math college you know? They usually get to be
persistent perhaps. I don't know. I advise a rule: never deal with
social issues, problems, truths. Everyone ho dealt with social issues
at large fell. Do the concrete problem locally and answer that
question. Use a shotgun and advise others not to do the same. :-))
the problem with these fields
in opposition to others
is that there seems to be some tradition of certainty here
math is considered true absolutely by a large segment of practitoners
( in whatever definition of truth they have rationalised )
science is considered to reveal the truth of nature
Well, not if the lectures are good enough. Instead you have nature to
speak beautiful things to you.
whether foundationally justified or not
these fields seem to attract the type that seek certainty
I dunno. Argumentative. Can you compare the titles between, say,
"Cosmology" and "Management of small bullshitting peanut company"? Its
about beauty no?
so when something is presented outside their knowledge
when they are confronted with a different approach or view
they regularly and immediately assume it is invalid
All the time. They are uneducated, its an unsupported function.
i have seen this regularly in my life
and it seems to have an added twist for women
for women
the assumption of wrongness seems accompanied with a
" she's alright, she's just a little confused, i'll come and correct
her "
attitude
almost an embarassment followed by rescuer fantasy
and then when source material is presented to provide a foundation for
the claims
others who may be aware of some of the source come in
_and_will_try_to_mediate_by_supporting_the_male_attacks_!
" well she's got some points here
but she's still wrong xyz "
and i find i haven't made any progress because the points are then
ignored
and the original assertion must still be defended
grigory perelman took exception to this behavior
by his peers in russia
who often mocked him for believing (correctly) to have proven
poincare's conjecture
but of course the prototypical example is rosalind franklin
whose ideas were mocked
whose appearance was mocked
by watson and crick after stealing her data and claiming her results
on the structure of DNA
do other women in these fields find the same behavior?
did it almost turn you away from the fields?
i've had professors tell me i was mistaken for thinking there was such
a thing as
noncommutative geometry
( " all spaces have commutative function spaces! " )
mocked for considering bohmian mechanics by a physics professor
who would regularly show me the new advances they were making
in extending aspect's results
berated for suggesting quantum logic solutions to homework problems
once
when i mentioned to an ex professor
that i had hypergeometric results which might be new
the professor told me
" I am sure you have worked hard on your little theorem. But the
literature
is vast, and even on the off chance you haven't any obvious
errors, the
result is probably known. You should find a professor doing
original
research and they can help you get started if that's what you
want. "
this was a professor who
was the putnam coach the year i scored highest in my state
worked in combinatorial sums and could easily have understood
refused to even look at my work
lately on these newgroups
steve carlip
whom i had always thought provided well-thought out responses
wrote:
" If you want to work on Bohmian mechanics as a program that
*might* eventually lead to a deterministic alternative to QFT,
that's fine (though be careful of your citations -- a number of
the QFT models you've referred to are explicitly *not*
deterministic).
But don't confuse your hopes with what has actually been shown
to be possible. "
did carlip know enough of bohmian mechanics to make this assertion?
of course not
like most posters in the thread
he only started reading the literature after i posted links to it
and his negativity carried the assumption that i
_who_had_posted_the_links_and_responses_that_introduced_him_to_it_
had no clue what i was talking about
i've been called crazy
because i discussed artemov's logic of proofs
as a resolution to the bhk semantics of constructivism
by people who had not read the papers
do other women find they continually have to justify themselves to
men?
is this a truly sexually dimorphic problem?
or am i not able to generalise this because of "special" circumstances
in my cases?
i am just wondering how others deal with this
For men, use fluids in the head over the top to switch inner world
into another mind.
( the guys can answer too
if they promise to take a shower and brush their teeth )
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: the male alpha problem in math and the sciences |
12 Apr 2007 05:19:27 AM |
|
|
[piggybacking post]
In article <1176374370.430853.210570@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
"boson boss" <junkerade@gmail.com> wrote:
On Apr 11, 9:25 pm, "galathaea" <galath...@gmail.com> wrote:
i have regularly found
that men tend to disbelieve me
if i discuss something they are unfamiliar with
Suggestion: work on your writing skills.
<snip>
i have seen this regularly in my life
and it seems to have an added twist for women
Then you haven't observed with objectivity. Males
are treated a lot worse.
<snip>
do other women in these fields find the same behavior?
Yes. But my treatment was from other females. I didn't have
much problem with most males. The few males I had problems
with had other issues.
did it almost turn you away from the fields?
Why would I let stupid people herd me away from the work
I had to do?
<snip>
did carlip know enough of bohmian mechanics to make this assertion?
<snip>
Instead of bitching, go do the work. You are trying to play the
"poor me, I'm getting picked on--please rescue me" games. That
gets attention in today's elhi schools but doesn't get any
productive work done. It's considered cute behaviour when you're
a child; it is annoying when you're in college. It is behaviour
that will cause you to be ignored when you're an adult.
/BAH
/BAH
.
|
|
|
| User: "galathaea" |
|
| Title: Re: the male alpha problem in math and the sciences |
12 Apr 2007 10:02:35 AM |
|
|
On Apr 12, 3:19 am, wrote:
[piggybacking post]
On Apr 11, 9:25 pm, "galathaea" <galath...@gmail.com> wrote:
i have regularly found
that men tend to disbelieve me
if i discuss something they are unfamiliar with
i have seen this regularly in my life
and it seems to have an added twist for women
Then you haven't observed with objectivity. Males
are treated a lot worse.
i did not intend to suggest
that men do not do this amongst each other
usenet is filled with
idiot
stoopid
ignoramous
and other one line retorts amounting to immediate disbelief
i mentioned perelman
particularly because i wanted to stress
that i recognised its impact on men
the "added twist" i mentioned
was that there is often
perhaps in my experience only
a tendency to replace the direct aggression
with a more compassionate dismissal
<snip>
do other women in these fields find the same behavior?
Yes. But my treatment was from other females. I didn't have
much problem with most males. The few males I had problems
with had other issues.
interesting
the few problems i had from other females
were always other issues
women dismissed your comments
and assumed you wrong?
and assumed themselves to know correctly?
i'd like to think that this is not a sexual difference
but it has not been my experience
" gender, mathematics, and science "
by marcia c linn and janet s hyde
( educational researcher v 18 n 8 pp 17-27 )
suggests that the research shows otherwise as well
however
could you generally describe an incident?
i would like to know what is different
and what is very much the same between the gender incidents
[...]
did carlip know enough of bohmian mechanics to make this assertion?
<snip>
Instead of bitching, go do the work. You are trying to play the
"poor me, I'm getting picked on--please rescue me" games. That
gets attention in today's elhi schools but doesn't get any
productive work done. It's considered cute behaviour when you're
a child; it is annoying when you're in college. It is behaviour
that will cause you to be ignored when you're an adult.
i do my work
and i take care of myself
( now )
that doesn't mean
i didn't rush home and cry
a number of times when it first happened
and it really is what drove me away from math
to get a more engineering (programming) job
i was just curious if other women had the same initial reaction
i admire your strength
which i do not always have
( despite my ability to tantrum now and then )
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: the male alpha problem in math and the sciences |
13 Apr 2007 05:15:12 AM |
|
|
In article <1176390155.799569.152610@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
"galathaea" <galathaea@gmail.com> wrote:
On Apr 12, 3:19 am, wrote:
[piggybacking post]
On Apr 11, 9:25 pm, "galathaea" <galath...@gmail.com> wrote:
i have regularly found
that men tend to disbelieve me
if i discuss something they are unfamiliar with
i have seen this regularly in my life
and it seems to have an added twist for women
Then you haven't observed with objectivity. Males
are treated a lot worse.
i did not intend to suggest
that men do not do this amongst each other
usenet is filled with
idiot
stoopid
ignoramous
and other one line retorts amounting to immediate disbelief
If you are implying that I am all of the above then you
certainly are just looking for attention and not trying
to figure out how to cope with the problems you have.
i mentioned perelman
particularly because i wanted to stress
that i recognised its impact on men
the "added twist" i mentioned
was that there is often
perhaps in my experience only
a tendency to replace the direct aggression
with a more compassionate dismissal
You are reading too much into it. If you act the way you
write here, then you would be dismissed as just another
annoying gnat.
<snip>
do other women in these fields find the same behavior?
Yes. But my treatment was from other females. I didn't have
much problem with most males. The few males I had problems
with had other issues.
interesting
the few problems i had from other females
were always other issues
You won't know until you start doing your work.
women dismissed your comments
and assumed you wrong?
Yup. And not comments, knowledge on how to do stuff.
and assumed themselves to know correctly?
Nope. I had to to anybody who had balls in their pants and
get approval. You appear to suffer from this malady. You
need approval from the males rather than just getting on with
your work.
i'd like to think that this is not a sexual difference
but it has not been my experience
On the contrary, you whole story is about getting OKs from males.
" gender, mathematics, and science "
by marcia c linn and janet s hyde
( educational researcher v 18 n 8 pp 17-27 )
suggests that the research shows otherwise as well
Well, from personal experience, all this is *****. In addition,
the highest grades in my high school math classes were earned by
females. The males were always lower.
however
could you generally describe an incident?
i would like to know what is different
and what is very much the same between the gender incidents
Instead of wasting your time on situations that can't be changed,
why don't you just start doing your work? You will encounter
resistence in everything you do all the time. This happens
to all people. Those who succeed are those who don't let
roadblocks stop them.
[...]
did carlip know enough of bohmian mechanics to make this assertion?
<snip>
Instead of bitching, go do the work. You are trying to play the
"poor me, I'm getting picked on--please rescue me" games. That
gets attention in today's elhi schools but doesn't get any
productive work done. It's considered cute behaviour when you're
a child; it is annoying when you're in college. It is behaviour
that will cause you to be ignored when you're an adult.
i do my work
and i take care of myself
( now )
that doesn't mean
i didn't rush home and cry
a number of times when it first happened
and it really is what drove me away from math
Nobody drove me away from anything. All decisions were mine,
and I learned how to live with the consequences of each
decision. The big word for this is self-responsibility.
to get a more engineering (programming) job
You are probably more suited to that kind of thinking.
i was just curious if other women had the same initial reaction
I've given you one instance where they didn't. Our company's math
person was a female. I had a lot of female friends in college
who were math people. All the EEO ***** that you have been
believing has been lies; again this if from my experience.
i admire your strength
Good grief. It's not strength. It's just living.
which i do not always have
( despite my ability to tantrum now and then )
Go do your work and stop wasting your time. Have you started
on the project that Dr. Carlip provided warning pointers?
/BAH
.
|
|
|
| User: "greysky" |
|
| Title: Re: the male alpha problem in math and the sciences |
13 Apr 2007 09:51:56 PM |
|
|
<jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:evnl7g$8qk_001@s814.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com...
In article <1176390155.799569.152610@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
<Snip garbage>
Pay no attention to this one. She is too busy sucking the milk of human
kindness from Uncle Al's tit...
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: the male alpha problem in math and the sciences |
14 Apr 2007 05:27:21 AM |
|
|
In article <glXTh.8735$u03.2512@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net>,
"greysky" <greysky@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
<jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:evnl7g$8qk_001@s814.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com...
In article <1176390155.799569.152610@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
<Snip garbage>
Pay no attention to this one. She is too busy sucking the milk of human
kindness from Uncle Al's tit...
I consider it part of my responsibility to fix the idiotic notion
that females can't do math because males won't let them. This
one is promoting that fairy tale in a sly manner.
/BAH
.
|
|
|
| User: "greysky" |
|
| Title: Re: the male alpha problem in math and the sciences |
14 Apr 2007 01:46:06 PM |
|
|
<jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:evqaa9$8qk_002@s1004.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com...
In article <glXTh.8735$u03.2512@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net>,
"greysky" <greysky@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
<jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:evnl7g$8qk_001@s814.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com...
In article <1176390155.799569.152610@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
<Snip garbage>
Pay no attention to this one. She is too busy sucking the milk of human
kindness from Uncle Al's tit...
I consider it part of my responsibility to fix the idiotic notion
that females can't do math because males won't let them. This
one is promoting that fairy tale in a sly manner.
*****. If you wanted to, I'd give you my income tax statement to fill
out - that is if you really were any good. Maybe you could have saved me ten
or twenty grand.... ahh...just a dream. Look what just happened to Don Imus
for 10 seconds of stooopidity - Uncle Al's been doing much worse for years.
Now, I can call him a liar as well - wasn't he *never* going to grace this
'river of *****' with his presence? Now he's posting again... and you defend
every ugly, venal, sick, perverted, racist, thing he says. Too bad Imus
didn't have you out there defending him...
Greysky
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Phineas T Puddleduck" |
|
| Title: Re: the male alpha problem in math and the sciences |
14 Apr 2007 09:48:17 AM |
|
|
In article <glXTh.8735$u03.2512@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net>,
"greysky" <greysky@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
<jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:evnl7g$8qk_001@s814.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com...
In article <1176390155.799569.152610@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
<Snip garbage>
Pay no attention to this one. She is too busy sucking the milk of human
kindness from Uncle Al's tit...
Says the loon who claims to have invented an FTL radio, yet refuses to
post schematics.
--
Got mail? I did ;-) Three and counting.
Got proof? Not yet, still waiting.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John \C" |
|
| Title: Re: the male alpha problem in math and the sciences |
14 Apr 2007 11:51:32 AM |
|
|
"Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:phineaspuddleduck-A5C809.15481714042007@news.octanews.com...
In article <glXTh.8735$u03.2512@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net>,
"greysky" <greysky@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
<jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:evnl7g$8qk_001@s814.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com...
In article <1176390155.799569.152610@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
<Snip garbage>
Pay no attention to this one. She is too busy sucking the milk of human
kindness from Uncle Al's tit...
Says the loon who claims to have invented an FTL radio, yet refuses to
post schematics.
And you're not a Loon, Gay Duck?!?
HJ
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "galathaea" |
|
| Title: Re: the male alpha problem in math and the sciences |
13 Apr 2007 10:17:09 AM |
|
|
On Apr 13, 3:15 am, wrote:
In article <1176390155.799569.152...@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
"galathaea" <galath...@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
usenet is filled with
idiot
stoopid
ignoramous
and other one line retorts amounting to immediate disbelief
If you are implying that I am all of the above then you
certainly are just looking for attention and not trying
to figure out how to cope with the problems you have.
it is common for women to believe
comments unrelated to them
may be about them
[...]
women dismissed your comments
and assumed you wrong?
Yup. And not comments, knowledge on how to do stuff.
and assumed themselves to know correctly?
Nope. I had to to anybody who had balls in their pants and
get approval. You appear to suffer from this malady. You
need approval from the males rather than just getting on with
your work.
i do my work
i do not ask approval to do my work
which is why i have regularly been the most productive engineer
( more npd coming )
last year
i had the greatest codeline output
and the least number of breakage or bugs
those two things do noy usually go together
" gender, mathematics, and science "
by marcia c linn and janet s hyde
( educational researcher v 18 n 8 pp 17-27 )
suggests that the research shows otherwise as well
Well, from personal experience, all this is *****. In addition,
the highest grades in my high school math classes were earned by
females. The males were always lower.
yes
exactly
i've never claimed differences in cognitive ability
i claimed differences in aggression
which i do not always have
( despite my ability to tantrum now and then )
Go do your work and stop wasting your time. Have you started
on the project that Dr. Carlip provided warning pointers?
actually
carlips point was full of *****
and i answered him immediately
but i see
your one of _those_
who doesn't read and evaluate the facts for herself
but just goto's authority
i didn't wait a couple of days to post the requested article
i posted immediately after he asked
after he claimed i was the one confused about the literature
i didn't have to spend some time
sifting through the literature to appear knowledgable
and try to figure out the literaure
indeed my posting history on the topic
already points to much of the literature
and if you were to look at the article i posted
you will also notice that it supports my idea
that bohminisation and geometric quantisation
are intimately connected
the quantisation of discrete operators
through projection on to a span of some configuration space
with regions corresponding to discrete values
is reproduced in the standard treatment
in terms of polarisations
so i get my job done
is there a reason you don't read responses
and simply spread and take it?
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: the male alpha problem in math and the sciences |
14 Apr 2007 05:23:26 AM |
|
|
In article <1176477429.213999.263580@b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
"galathaea" <galathaea@gmail.com> wrote:
On Apr 13, 3:15 am, wrote:
In article <1176390155.799569.152...@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
"galathaea" <galath...@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
usenet is filled with
idiot
stoopid
ignoramous
and other one line retorts amounting to immediate disbelief
If you are implying that I am all of the above then you
certainly are just looking for attention and not trying
to figure out how to cope with the problems you have.
it is common for women to believe
comments unrelated to them
may be about them
I'm beginning to think I've wasted my time.
[...]
women dismissed your comments
and assumed you wrong?
Yup. And not comments, knowledge on how to do stuff.
and assumed themselves to know correctly?
Nope. I had to to anybody who had balls in their pants and
get approval. You appear to suffer from this malady. You
need approval from the males rather than just getting on with
your work.
i do my work
i do not ask approval to do my work
which is why i have regularly been the most productive engineer
( more npd coming )
last year
i had the greatest codeline output
and the least number of breakage or bugs
Oh, dear.
those two things do noy usually go together
Sounds like the metrics used in your area are similar to the
WPM metric that secretaries had.
" gender, mathematics, and science "
by marcia c linn and janet s hyde
( educational researcher v 18 n 8 pp 17-27 )
suggests that the research shows otherwise as well
Well, from personal experience, all this is *****. In addition,
the highest grades in my high school math classes were earned by
females. The males were always lower.
yes
exactly
i've never claimed differences in cognitive ability
i claimed differences in aggression
You've been bitching about not getting recognized immediately by
all people you bug.
which i do not always have
( despite my ability to tantrum now and then )
Go do your work and stop wasting your time. Have you started
on the project that Dr. Carlip provided warning pointers?
actually
carlips point was full of *****
and i answered him immediately
I have been wasting my time. You are not able to identify experts
nor listen to their pointers.
but i see
your one of _those_
who doesn't read and evaluate the facts for herself
but just goto's authority
You are just trolling.
i didn't wait a couple of days to post the requested article
i posted immediately after he asked
after he claimed i was the one confused about the literature
He didn't say that. He also explained further. I suspect he
had assumed that you had enough background to understand what
he wrote...but you do not.
i didn't have to spend some time
sifting through the literature to appear knowledgable
and try to figure out the literaure
So you don't think you have to do the work.
indeed my posting history on the topic
already points to much of the literature
and if you were to look at the article i posted
you will also notice that it supports my idea
that bohminisation and geometric quantisation
are intimately connected
the quantisation of discrete operators
through projection on to a span of some configuration space
with regions corresponding to discrete values
is reproduced in the standard treatment
in terms of polarisations
so i get my job done
is there a reason you don't read responses
and simply spread and take it?
Here's a ton of Kleenix, kid.
/BAH
.
|
|
|
| User: "galathaea" |
|
| Title: the male alpha problem in math and the sciences |
14 Apr 2007 11:42:57 AM |
|
|
wrote:
In article <1176477429.213999.263580@b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
"galathaea" <galathaea@gmail.com> wrote:
Go do your work and stop wasting your time. Have you started
on the project that Dr. Carlip provided warning pointers?
actually
carlips point was full of *****
and i answered him immediately
I have been wasting my time. You are not able to identify experts
nor listen to their pointers.
no
you most certainly are not wasting your time
you've put no time into your position at all
you haven't read the literature
or even the one paper that i took the time to post
to discredit carlip's dismissal
instead you have made it clear to anyone following the argument
who has even a minimum scientific reading comprehension
that you are not a scientist
you are merely a toady
that follows up anyone you have already given intellectual alpha
status to
and feels safe in defending their position without comprehension
to make it easier for others to see your foolishness
http://www.iop.org/EJ/article/0305-4470/37/44/L02/a4_44_l02.html
but i see
your one of _those_
who doesn't read and evaluate the facts for herself
but just goto's authority
You are just trolling.
that's a great word for you to use
it causes all the cognitive dissonance you need
to avoid actually confronting any real science
don't think i
or any other lurkers with minimal logical ability
do not realise you have stated nothing on the actual issue
instead
you like to sound more like a physical education coach
barking your "get to work" orders left and right
not realising
because you do not want to realise
the work was done before you ever came on the scene
i didn't wait a couple of days to post the requested article
i posted immediately after he asked
after he claimed i was the one confused about the literature
He didn't say that. He also explained further. I suspect he
had assumed that you had enough background to understand what
he wrote...but you do not.
yeah
he explained further that he really objected
to anyone claiming that bohmian mechanics could give a theory
of deterministic quantum field theory
he also tried to pass off some of his knowledge on quantum gravity
to explain why he was dismissive of the bohmian approach there
and generally gave a lot of unrelated handwaving on why dismissing was
valid
you
give a lot of handwaving on why carlip is right
keeping your comments purposely vague in the same way he originally
did
because it is a classic method
now common on usenet
to appear knowledgeable about subjects
you haven't yet found the right wikipedia page to support yourself on
did i mention
http://www.iop.org/EJ/article/0305-4470/37/44/L02/a4_44_l02.html
?
i didn't have to spend some time
sifting through the literature to appear knowledgable
and try to figure out the literaure
So you don't think you have to do the work.
again
your purposefully bad reading comprehension
does not score debate points
and only illustrates your lack of substance
i have already read that literature
numerous times
i keep filing cabinets full of papers at my home
so i can organise the research to my own pursuits
in fact
looking over your entire message
it is clear your message is much better suited
for mister carlip and yourself
indeed my posting history on the topic
already points to much of the literature
and if you were to look at the article i posted
you will also notice that it supports my idea
that bohminisation and geometric quantisation
are intimately connected
the quantisation of discrete operators
through projection on to a span of some configuration space
with regions corresponding to discrete values
is reproduced in the standard treatment
in terms of polarisations
so i get my job done
is there a reason you don't read responses
and simply spread and take it?
Here's a ton of Kleenix, kid.
exactly
and wherever substance is provided
you look away
avoidance mechanisms are a *****
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: the male alpha problem in math and the sciences |
15 Apr 2007 05:10:50 AM |
|
|
In article <1176568977.341611.23920@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
"galathaea" <galathaea@gmail.com> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
In article <1176477429.213999.263580@b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
"galathaea" <galathaea@gmail.com> wrote:
Go do your work and stop wasting your time. Have you started
on the project that Dr. Carlip provided warning pointers?
actually
carlips point was full of *****
and i answered him immediately
I have been wasting my time. You are not able to identify experts
nor listen to their pointers.
no
you most certainly are not wasting your time
you've put no time into your position at all
I have spent about an hour writing to you.
you haven't read the literature
or even the one paper that i took the time to post
to discredit carlip's dismissal
Dr. Carlip expanded on his original post. But that doesn't
count, does it? It gave you pointers to be careful about certain
things. Even I, who are not familiar with the subject matter,
was able to understand that. Instead of doing your own work,
you want him to do it all and admire you for ordering him to do so.
instead you have made it clear to anyone following the argument
who has even a minimum scientific reading comprehension
that you are not a scientist
I never claimed I was. I've not been talking about the particular
geometry matter. It was you who started claiming that it
was males' fault for you not getting into math.
you are merely a toady
that follows up anyone you have already given intellectual alpha
status to
and feels safe in defending their position without comprehension
Child, I was the alpha female. I don't have to toady to anybody.
to make it easier for others to see your foolishness
http://www.iop.org/EJ/article/0305-4470/37/44/L02/a4_44_l02.html
but i see
your one of _those_
who doesn't read and evaluate the facts for herself
but just goto's authority
You are just trolling.
that's a great word for you to use
it causes all the cognitive dissonance you need
to avoid actually confronting any real science
don't think i
or any other lurkers with minimal logical ability
do not realise you have stated nothing on the actual issue
I was talking about real life experience but you apparently
don't count that as fact.
instead
you like to sound more like a physical education coach
barking your "get to work" orders left and right
not realising
because you do not want to realise
the work was done before you ever came on the scene
It is your responsibility to do the work; not Dr. Carlip
nor anybody else.
i didn't wait a couple of days to post the requested article
i posted immediately after he asked
after he claimed i was the one confused about the literature
He didn't say that. He also explained further. I suspect he
had assumed that you had enough background to understand what
he wrote. | | | | | | | | |
