I would like to begin a thread within this section related to possible deep connections between Prime Numbers/Mersenne Primes and Kissing Numbers.
May I have the permission of the special moderators to begin such a thread?
This request is in response to statements by, moderator, Rpenner, that there is already an alternative sub-forum upon this forum for more "alternative imaginings."
I do not believe this to be the case, but with your cooperation, perhaps we can get one going.
Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
Kindest Regards,
Raphie Frank
To the moderators:
I plan to begin a thread within this section of the Physorg Forum (as noted above), near term.
I do NOT expect sudden moderator intervention after failure to respond to the above, very simple, question for the better part of a month.
Best,
Raphie
I plan to begin a thread within this section of the Physorg Forum (as noted above), near term.
I do NOT expect sudden moderator intervention after failure to respond to the above, very simple, question for the better part of a month.
Best,
Raphie
<edit>
Actually I concur on this point.
I have already expressed the idea that this forum would be well served with a specific area for "crackpot" theories. That way, anyone engaging in a discussion there knows what to expect going in.
It would also clear up a lot of threads that really should not be included in a science forum ... such as the interminable series of inane theories by sOcratus, etc.
Of course, the admin might want to name it something more ... diplomatic.
I have already expressed the idea that this forum would be well served with a specific area for "crackpot" theories. That way, anyone engaging in a discussion there knows what to expect going in.
It would also clear up a lot of threads that really should not be included in a science forum ... such as the interminable series of inane theories by sOcratus, etc.
Of course, the admin might want to name it something more ... diplomatic.
Comments regarding "diplomacy" aside, perhaps you missed this part of my previous post, Rob...
QUOTE (Raphie Frank+Jul 10 2009, 05:15 AM)
What should NOT be conveyed?
E) This is a "separate but equal" zone ala Deep South America circa 1952.
As such, the word "crank," in IMHO should be no more incorporated into any name regarding a sub-forum for free thought than words such as the "n"-word should be incorporated in regards to matters pertaining to basic human dignity.
Points, however, for honesty and transparency.
Best,
Raphie
E) This is a "separate but equal" zone ala Deep South America circa 1952.
As such, the word "crank," in IMHO should be no more incorporated into any name regarding a sub-forum for free thought than words such as the "n"-word should be incorporated in regards to matters pertaining to basic human dignity.
Points, however, for honesty and transparency.
Best,
Raphie
.
Hi again, everyone. Just popped in briefly to tidy up extraneous topics which have cropped up here during my extended absence. I have moved a couple of extraneous topics out of here and into the main forum.
Hi Raphie! Regarding your question, I have to stress, for all to note, that the threads in this cosmology "Theorising" special project sub-forum relate DIRECTLY to pre/post discussions and inputs to the Q&A thread process/logic flow......as well as to threads discussing/treating insights/ramifications arising from progressive results of each Q&A stage completion etc.
However.......
Since future discussions in this sub-forum's MATHEMATICS/NUMBER THEORY etc thread MAY (depending on insights/ramifications flowing from the main Q&A "theorising process") eventually also involve YOUR proposed discussions about such 'connections/ramifications' to/from whatever arises as this project progresses, please feel free to 'seed' the mathematics/number theory thread here with 'ongoing discussion points' material which you feel may be relevant to present/future considerations of any math/number-related aspects of whatever the PHYSICAL ASPECTS the logic flow comes up with in every stage of our theorising process in this special project.
Please be careful though (Raphie, everyone), to avoid inputing/espousing spurious axioms/propositions and/or connections/ramifications which are patently NON-PHYSICAL........ie, any axioms/propositions UNABLE to BE eventually relatable DIRECTLY to PHYSICAL CONCEPTS/PHENOMENA theoretical results that flows from our PHYSICS ONLY BASED theorising process; wherein any Q&A stage results therefrom must THEMSELVES meet and pass the 'real world physics reference' tests at every stage!
So go to it Raphie.....but, AT THIS STAGE, ONLY in the EXISTING math/number thread please!).....and bearing in mind the preceding cautionary proviso of course! Good luck!
I hope to see you and everyone more regularly after a week or so from now, health permitting.
Cheers all....and good luck and good thinking!
RC.
.
PS: Raphie....someone sent me a PM re your thread about the 'neg machine' types out there. Thanks for your fairness efforts on my behalf against such mindlessness anti-science/social types. But please ignore them. They are a spent force as far as I'm concerned. One especially so after I came up with the very thing he said it was impossible to do regarding analysis of photon-in-gravity-well experimental components/mechanisms! hehe. He and the rest of such types are no real scientists, but merely unoriginal technicians following but not comprehending science done by others. Don't waste your energies engaging in seeking justice against such types, as there are too many of such mindless/unoriginal 'safe/slave' types; they are all without an original scientific-enquiry/solution thought amongst them....however adept they may be at the established math 'homework' marking. Cheers! RC.
.
Hi again, everyone. Just popped in briefly to tidy up extraneous topics which have cropped up here during my extended absence. I have moved a couple of extraneous topics out of here and into the main forum.
Hi Raphie! Regarding your question, I have to stress, for all to note, that the threads in this cosmology "Theorising" special project sub-forum relate DIRECTLY to pre/post discussions and inputs to the Q&A thread process/logic flow......as well as to threads discussing/treating insights/ramifications arising from progressive results of each Q&A stage completion etc.
However.......
Since future discussions in this sub-forum's MATHEMATICS/NUMBER THEORY etc thread MAY (depending on insights/ramifications flowing from the main Q&A "theorising process") eventually also involve YOUR proposed discussions about such 'connections/ramifications' to/from whatever arises as this project progresses, please feel free to 'seed' the mathematics/number theory thread here with 'ongoing discussion points' material which you feel may be relevant to present/future considerations of any math/number-related aspects of whatever the PHYSICAL ASPECTS the logic flow comes up with in every stage of our theorising process in this special project.
Please be careful though (Raphie, everyone), to avoid inputing/espousing spurious axioms/propositions and/or connections/ramifications which are patently NON-PHYSICAL........ie, any axioms/propositions UNABLE to BE eventually relatable DIRECTLY to PHYSICAL CONCEPTS/PHENOMENA theoretical results that flows from our PHYSICS ONLY BASED theorising process; wherein any Q&A stage results therefrom must THEMSELVES meet and pass the 'real world physics reference' tests at every stage!
So go to it Raphie.....but, AT THIS STAGE, ONLY in the EXISTING math/number thread please!).....and bearing in mind the preceding cautionary proviso of course! Good luck!
I hope to see you and everyone more regularly after a week or so from now, health permitting.
Cheers all....and good luck and good thinking!
RC.
.
PS: Raphie....someone sent me a PM re your thread about the 'neg machine' types out there. Thanks for your fairness efforts on my behalf against such mindlessness anti-science/social types. But please ignore them. They are a spent force as far as I'm concerned. One especially so after I came up with the very thing he said it was impossible to do regarding analysis of photon-in-gravity-well experimental components/mechanisms! hehe. He and the rest of such types are no real scientists, but merely unoriginal technicians following but not comprehending science done by others. Don't waste your energies engaging in seeking justice against such types, as there are too many of such mindless/unoriginal 'safe/slave' types; they are all without an original scientific-enquiry/solution thought amongst them....however adept they may be at the established math 'homework' marking. Cheers! RC.
.
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.