[seqfan] Re: A139414

[Jonathan Post]

Re: numerologists and pseudoscientists.

There's an interesting comment by Chris Phoenix, a software
professional and ex-teacher, as to the ecological/evolutionary value
(on the plane of ideas) of crackpots.  This was in reply to a
classification of geniuses by Professor David Bacon.

http://scienceblogs.com/pontiff/2009/01/brains_brains_brains_brains.php#comments

I suspect that this can be true, now and then, in Mathematics. Even if
99% of self-deluded tripe on squaring circles and disproving Cantor's
Diagonalization proof (as recently on an arXiv paper), or grotesquely
misinterpreting Godel, there is still some 1% which, however
improperly demonstrated and packaged, observe something interesting
which more professional mathematicians may turn into acceptable
results. I don't know, psychiatrically, why so many sad people are
obsessed with disproving Archimedes, Bernoulli, Cantor, Darwin,
Einstein, Fermat, Godel, Hilbert, or others, as if they must slay some
Oedipal farther-figure of authority.  But I am not a psychiatrist, nor
is njas.

In that context, even if there is a flood of sequences which are akin
to Sequence Spam in my opinion; in the opinion of others I may have
been just as prolifically guilty; hence I conclude that the notion of
"encyclopedia" is indeed the key one.

Even in the infinite and random Library of Jorge Luis Borges, . "La
Biblioteca de Babel" (1941), in Ficciones. Madrid: Alianza, 1971;
English translation, "The Library of Babel", every true book is to be
found, however diluted by every typographically mutated or meaningless
book.

That is a story that encompasses a world. The world that is a library,
a library that is a universe broken into endless hexagons connected by
stairs and hallways. It's unlike any library that has ever existed, a
library of the mind, a virtual library.

I consider OEIS simultaneously the greatest index to "real math" on
the Web, a priceless tool for identifying sequences and variants of
sequences. a unique way to tap into the hard-copy libraries of
mathematics and the online preprints, and a library of the mind.

I was in favor of segregating sequences to deprecate "less" and
"probation", but I can see the "First Amendment absolutist" argument
for letting many correctly spelled correctly formatted sequences in as
free expression, even if I cannot fathom what they are trying to
express, or why, nor waste my time reading them, any more than I don't
stoop to pick up every scrap of paper blowing along the sidewalk.

I further thank njas and his outstanding Associate Editors for their
patiently grooming me from a ragged and irritating "usual suspect"
into a sometimes useful collaborator.  As a teacher, I like to think
that I never give up on any student who is willing to meet me halfway.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

prof. Jonathan Vos Post

On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Benoît Jubin <benoit.jubin at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> After having used the OEIS and its webcam for a while, I think there
> are hundreds, even thousands, of totally uninteresting sequences in
> the OEIS.  I first thought they were a stain on the OEIS, making
> exterior people think it was a place crowded with numerologists and
> pseudo-scientists.  And this puzzled me since I appreciate much this
> wonderful tool and the work of all its editors and contributors.
>
> Nevertheless, I think that these sequences should remain, because of
> the 'E' of OEIS, that is, the will to be encyclopedic, or universal,
> even towards the less interesting.  Also, we never know if a sequence
> won't turn out to be of particular interest in the future (the history
> of mathematics is filled with such examples).
>
> This was my humble opinion, somewhere between the clumsy and the
> obvious.  Also, I'm aware that sometimes, considering a sequence
> uninteresting only reveals my ignorance.
>
> Regards,
> Benoit Jubin
>
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 8:04 AM, N. J. A. Sloane <njas at research.att.com> wrote:
>> Joerg,
>>
>> I already deleted A139414 and A155814 once,
>> but three people objected (Bagula, Smith, Seidov), so I
>> reinstated them.  That was sufficient reason, I felt.
>>
>> Neil
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>