http://snowrain.kr/tc/snowall/ What lies are truths? What truths are lies? en Sun, 01 Mar 2009 10:53:32 +0900 Textcube 1.7.6 : Staccato http://snowrain.kr/tc/attach/1/4721899752.png http://snowrain.kr/tc/snowall/ 48 48 What lies are truths? What truths are lies? http://snowrain.kr/tc/snowall/5#comment49 Actually, shoutwing that expression is irrational isn't really the crucial part of the proof. If that was the case, Mr. Lee's proof should be valid for many different values of $n$, for which one can verify that expression is irrational. The proofs for n=3, 5, 7 etc were all proven with great difficulty and sophisticated techiques. If this proof works even for these three cases, it would be something. (Fish) http://snowrain.kr/tc/snowall/5#comment49 http://snowrain.kr/tc/snowall/5#comment Thu, 26 Jun 2008 11:11:09 +0900 http://snowrain.kr/tc/snowall/5#comment47 Thanks for your comment. :) (snowall) http://snowrain.kr/tc/snowall/5#comment47 http://snowrain.kr/tc/snowall/5#comment Wed, 25 Jun 2008 11:53:45 +0900 http://snowrain.kr/tc/snowall/5#comment46 This Mr. Lee has been spamming graduate schools all over the world. This was the second time our department got hit by this e-mail. I can't really say anything about the version that Mr. Lee submitted to the KMS, since the copy I got is in English, and presumeably the one he submitted to KMS woud be in Korean? First off, it is incomprehensible. Not only is the English very bad, but the notation Mr. Lee uses makes things 10 times more difficult to understand what he is trying to say. The structure of the proofs and the paper is very confusing -- it's hard to tell exactly what is trying to prove or whether his trying to do a proof by contradiction or whatever. He spends at least two pages showing the most trivial things that even a middle schooler can verify about the FLT, such as showing that FLT is meaning less for n=0. But when it comes to the important, difficult proofs, he asserts that it's "obviously" true. Whoever questions this, on his blog or through e-mail are met with responses, which range from, "You know a lot, but you lack wisdom," or "You didn't read the proof," or "Why don't you go back and study some middle school math." To make things worse, his paper is littered with typos. It's almost as if he himself didn't read the paper. The copy I got recently and the one I got months ago were exactly the same. Putting the incomprehensibility aside, is there anything salvageable there? The answer: not really. Sure, he did some high school algebra using his complicated notations. But none of these are meaningful. He also makes many false statements, which I'm not sure is a typo, a mistranslation, or just complete nonsense. It's hard to believe that this man, who apparently came up with a prove almost 5~6 years ago, have been circulating this typo-littered piece of garbage all over the world, telling everyone how the KMS is trying to screw him over. The fact that he hasn't even corrected the simple mistakes in his paper, the fact that he calls Wiles's proof a "guess," saying his proof is "perfect," spamming other departments, suing the KMS for not accepting his paper, tells me that Mr. Lee is a very arrogant man. I find both Mr. Lee and his "proofs" despicable and disgraceful. Sorry for the long rant. (Fish) http://snowrain.kr/tc/snowall/5#comment46 http://snowrain.kr/tc/snowall/5#comment Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:29:12 +0900 http://snowrain.kr/tc/snowall/6#comment8 Thanks! (snowall) http://snowrain.kr/tc/snowall/6#comment8 http://snowrain.kr/tc/snowall/6#comment Sat, 19 Jan 2008 12:36:46 +0900 http://snowrain.kr/tc/snowall/6#comment7 I'm glad to see you started an English Blog :) ! (Growing) http://snowrain.kr/tc/snowall/6#comment7 http://snowrain.kr/tc/snowall/6#comment Sat, 19 Jan 2008 02:54:14 +0900