Re: Functions, the complex plane and Riemann surfaces.
From: David C. Ullrich (ullrich_at_math.okstate.edu)
Date: 07/29/04
- Next message: David Wagner: "Re: Linear constraint formulation"
- Previous message: Mitch Harris: "Re: Yet another Attempt at Disproving the Halting Problem"
- In reply to: Kent Paul Dolan: "Re: Functions, the complex plane and Riemann surfaces."
- Next in thread: conesetter: "Re: Functions, the complex plane and Riemann surfaces."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 10:14:49 -0500
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 18:05:21 +0000 (UTC), "Kent Paul Dolan"
<xanthian@well.com> wrote:
>"David C. Ullrich" <ullrich@math.okstate.edu> wrote:
>
>> Uh, we got up on the wrong side of the bed this
>> morning, did we?
>
>Every morning for at least the last 20 years, when
>it comes to dealing with fools who insist on
>pretending they haven't been caught in an error
is that what i've been doing? i don't recall insisting
on any such thing.
>when
>the rock solid evidence that they have has been
>shown to them and to the world, as is your situation
>in this case.
>
>Do we stop trusting what you post about math, now
>that we know, based on your behavior in other areas
>of discourse, that you are of such low moral
>character that you will deliberately promulgate
>falsehoods knowing them to be false, rather than
>suffer admitting you are incorrect? That is
>certainly a sad outcome, if so. Funny thing, David,
>but you only have _the one_ reputation; destroy it,
>you destroy all of it.
guffaw. i think that -you- had better stop trusting
what i say about math - i doubt that many others have
any concern about this. [the idea that people should
believe the things i say about math because of some
sort of -trust- is very funny, btw.]
>>> "(1) In order that the author of a literary or
>>> artistic work protected by this Convention shall, in
>>> the absence of proof to the contrary, be regarded as
>>> such, and consequently be entitled to institute
>>> infringement proceedings in the countries of the
>>> Union, it shall be sufficient for his name to appear
>>> on the work in the usual manner. This paragraph
>>> shall be applicable even if this name is a
>>> pseudonym, where the pseudonym adopted by the author
>>> leaves no doubt as to his identity."
>
>>> http://www.law.cornell.edu/treaties/berne/15.html
>
>>> A working email address is more than sufficent to
>>> "leave no doubt as to his identity",
>
>> Right. So tell me, what's conesetter's real name?
>
>As a practicing mathematician, are you really
>claiming to be confusing knowing two things are
>identical with knowing what either of them is
>_named_?
uh, no. we're not talking about math. most mathematical
objects do not even -have- names; we determine they're
identical through other sorts of identification.
otoh knowing a person's identity is -typically-
correlated with knowing his name.
if you don't know his name then in what other sense
-do- you have no doubt regarding his identity?
>Give me a break.
>
>A person's "identity" is not that person's name,
i didn't say it was.
>or
>legal change of name would make a person unidentical
>to his former self.
the fact that a person's identity is not the same thing
as his name does not imply that there's no connection
between the two. if george changes his name to fred
but keeps this fact -secret- then he's -not- going to
be regarded as the same person as fred legally. that
name change would make it impossible for the law to
consider him the same person - if he wants to enjoy
rights given him by some document made before the
change he has to acknowledge that he's the person
formerly known as george.
>Notice that the issue addressed
>in article 15 section 1 is the bringing of suit for
>infringement. Conesetter owes no one his/her name
>until such suit is pursued, but the copyright exists
>_now_ [and existed without being claimed, the Berne
>convention differentiates only the kinds of damages
>that may be pursued based on whether the copyright
>claim is implicit or explicit, not the existence of
>the copyright, which exists at the moment the work
>is created].
>
>>> and if the ISP keeps adequate records, even the
>>> message ID will suffice.
>
>>> There's still a chance for you to achieve
>>> adulthood before dying of old age, but it
>>> decreases day-for-day with the passage of time.
>>> My advice, from near the end of that span of
>>> opportunity, is that you don't delay overlong
>>> your choice to exercise that option; it gets more
>>> difficult with advancing years.
>
>Read that again, so far you haven't taken the point.
no, mom, i haven't 'taken' that point. [giggle...]
>xanthian.
************************
David C. Ullrich
sorry about the inelegant formatting - typing
one-handed for a few weeks...
- Next message: David Wagner: "Re: Linear constraint formulation"
- Previous message: Mitch Harris: "Re: Yet another Attempt at Disproving the Halting Problem"
- In reply to: Kent Paul Dolan: "Re: Functions, the complex plane and Riemann surfaces."
- Next in thread: conesetter: "Re: Functions, the complex plane and Riemann surfaces."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
