Thread: "Rare" Primes
View Single Post
Old 2008-08-20, 15:18   #10
R.D. Silverman
 
R.D. Silverman's Avatar
 
Nov 2003

11101001001002 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cheesehead View Post
Perhaps your fear has clouded your reasoning, professor.

The original question's appropriate uses of the mathematical terms "Generalized Fermat", "Subfactorial !n", "Wilson primes", "Double Mersenne", "Fermat prime", and "Repunit" are unlikely to have been composed by someone with a "total lack of mathematical understanding".

Are you genuinely unable to discern, or at least politely respond to, the intent behind awkward wordings of mathematically-related postings? Or is it instead a matter of using this forum to vent anger that might otherwise, and less desireably, be expressed elsewhere in your life?
I am not the one who labelled the response to the original question
as coming from a moron.

And knowing the NAME of something is not the same as understanding it.
(A paraphrased quote from Richard Feynman). The fact that the O.P.
knows the names of a few objects is not an indication that he understands
mathematics.

The original query, as posed, used vague English words (e.g. rare prime) to
try to convey some mathematical idea. Mathematics is a domain of
knowledge in which it is possible to state PRECISELY what is intended.
The fact that the original poser used vague language and gave a very
poorly posed question is what makes clear that he lacks understanding of
mathematics.

The first response to the problem was a totally correct and precise
response to WHAT WAS ASKED. And then the O.P. labelled the
response as coming from a moron.

I notice that you failed to chide the O.P. for his response. Can you
say "double standard"??
R.D. Silverman is offline   Reply With Quote