Well generally, I believe most people post math in their posts are just assumed not to be their own.
But it's assumed (and usually demonstrated) they understand that of which they post. You demonstrate time and again you don't.
If I wrote a post on quantum field theory it'd be assumed (and I'd happily demonstrate) I'm giving my own words of someone else's work which I've learnt and understood. That's what rational discussion is all about. If I were just parroting someone else's work without understanding it then I'm being dishonest and it's not welcome here. Hence why your posts are often beaten with hammers.
On plenty occassions I have came to the site and manifested some equations for tough peer review.
And without fail you've been wrong in multiple, basic, ways which demonstrates to everyone that when you then talk about more advanced stuff you're just pulling it out of your backside or just parroting. Everyone here can use Google or Wiki, they don't need you to essentially copy and paste (after introducing your own errors) material.
Pulling them up is a different thing however completely. In my case, no one asked for citations, niether did anyone even give me a chance to rebuttal AN's claim I was committing Plagiarism. I have never done it.
There is no defence when the evidence is right there in CK's posts.
The thread was locked and closed with an assortment of accusations, hollow and unjust.
You've had 20+ accounts here, you've had plenty of time to demonstrate a
working honest understanding of material and you perpetually fail.
(Personally the cite members who are into physics hate it when I talk physics, like the subject should be banned to me or something. Yet they know clearly that I can talk about the subjects they flaunt about and call themselves professionals on.)
You can parrot things you don't understand but that isn't really 'talking' any more than me copying words out of a translation dictionary is speaking a foreign language.
He might disagree that he lets other people make sloppy posts as a favour.
I don't cut Mister any slack because he's used up all his slack.
Even if Rpenner is excused for now, too many posts I have read by others linked by me, are prime examples of no one citing their work. Indeed, AN the dirty low life has done himself. Hypocritical BS is what I call it.
You really do love to whine and dig your own hole, don't you?
Rpenner
understands what he posts. He reads someone else's work, understands it and then reexplained it in the thread. That's fine. You
don't understand it so you have to just lift, wholesale, people's equations and explainations. It's why you misunderstood Susskind, you don't actually grasp what he was saying, you just repeat phrases and buzzwords.
That is a trillion miles from what Rpenner and I or anyone else do.
If you just were honest and didn't try to misrepresent your level of knowledge you'd not have a problem. The issue is your
dishonesty, not the posting of equations.
Unfair me thinks. Total abuse of power from the low life AN.
Seriously, get off your cross.
I am
absolutely certain you're misrepresenting your level of understanding. To do that you lift things directly from other people's work, rather than explain/discuss it in purely your own words. That's the problem. That's
your problem.
I am just some scarecrow the mods like to throw apples at.
A scarecrow who paints himself bright orange and runs around saying "Look at me, I'm an elephant!" and then complain when people whose attention
you demand (hence all these threads whining and repeated reregistering and repeated dishonesty) say "Some of the things you're saying are incorrect".
What do you expect? You come to a physics forum you know numerous doctorates, including both moderators, read, spout stuff which you know you don't understand and are then surprised when people notice all your mistakes? It's like me going to Germany, making up words and then being surprised when a German says "That isn't German!". You're seeking out people who are
professionals in maths/physics and trying to BS them about their profession!
I hate to say this,but I must since there is an overwhelming body of evidence in my favour.
No, there isn't. You're failing to understand the essential distinction between your postings and the postings of people like myself or Rpenner.
Tell you what, when you come back why don't you list, explicitly and clearly and definitively, the areas of mathematical physics you feel you have a
working understanding of and the level of that understanding. For example, I'd say I have a working understanding of much of quantum mechanics to postgrad level. My understanding of French is to GCSE level (that's age 16 for the non-British among us). I have an understanding of Welsh to age 14. I have
zero understanding of Japanese.
You're currently banned for the remainder of the year so you have plenty of time to compile that list. You may post it here or PM it to me but you really have no excuse not to be open about your understanding so we can all know what you do or don't know.
