> Lucas Wiman made a wonderful job of the FAQ - but not *every* question
> is in there... if it were, what would be the point of having a mailing
> list anyway?
Nor should every question be in there. I wrote the FAQ to promote
*interesting* mathematical discussion, and prevent rehash of the same
questions every couple of weeks.
Besides, where do we draw the line? "Why can't people read back issues
of Math. Comp. from 1930?"
> Or is, as Paul says, the list meant to be a
> forum for people to shoot down every well-meaning question just because
> they're farther up the learning curve?
I understand the frustration with people who ask "simplistic" questions,
I mean I wrote the FAQ for goodness sake. But if a question is that
annoying to you, delete the message and let others (who have more
patience) field the question. Don't waste your obviously quite valuable
time with such an intellectually lazy simpleton.
> > *** Why? The mathematics is simple and well understood and has been
known
> > for centuries. Did you check the literature first, before wasting your
> > time??
I find that often to understand something fully, I must derive the theorem
on my own. I don't know why that is, but remember not everyone learns
by reading endless books about theory.
> My 8-year old is fascinated that she can multiply by 9, add the digits up,
> and get back to 9 again. Perhaps I should take the above villain's advice,
> tell her she is wasting her time, and ignore her completely. I think not.
An excellent point!
> As Lucas Wiman recently said to me (off-list, and I hope he doesn't mind me
> quoting it), what if Hardy had instead said, "This Indian fellow is not
> worth my time?".
I don't mind a bit.
> Those who recognize it, please, just smile about it.
HaHaHaHaHaHa! :)
-Lucas
_________________________________________________________________
Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
