Slashdot Mirror

Mathworld has a link to a paper which claims de Branges' method of proof is invalid. Here is a direct link to the site with the paper.

Mathworld is good, but I found it very hard to learn something new with it - the articles usually assume that you know the stuff, and use them as a reference.

Also, you can use http://mathworld.com as well.

Hi, I am ph.D student in Math. Most of the useful math that you are going to need is going to start with college algebra/trigonometry. Then Calculus/Statistics/Linear Algebra. The only way to learn these is to do problems. If you are disciplined enough to work them on your own, then that is the key. But then, who do you turn to. Perhaps you could hire a tutor when you need help? Other than this idea, you should have an instructor to assign problems to you and keep you working. The only way to learn math is by doing example problems. Good reference: MathWorld.com

I don't mean to troll but are there any books on CD with DEEPER content? It would be very nice if there was an comprehensive online library, unlike Wathmorld, that contained useful knowledge.

I think the key to Internet publishing is patience. If your work is a roar, you won't get a big exposure to it as fast as with a printed edition. On the other hand, if you slowly, patiently wait for a following to form, and defer publication offers until you feel you have the upper hand, you may come up the winner.

(Of course, always keep in mind the MathWorld fiasco.)

I find on-line publishing much more satisfying than, say, vanity press. I write short fiction, which is pretty much an unpublishable genre today; but the Web lets me review and revise in an open-ended fashion, control the presentation aspects (not very well, admittedly), editorialize ad lib, etcetera. And it doesn't need more self-promotion than a well-landed link in Open Directory/Google and/or an affiliate link program. The latter can be even informal: find a site you like, convince them that they like your site, and swap links.

That's how the Web was supposed to work five years ago.

And absolute control was definitely one of his priorities. Mathworld was protected by some of the most stringent anti-mirroring measures I have seen. If the web server thought too large of fraction of the archive had gone to any IP or group of IP's, they banned the entire network. With a few rare exceptions, such bannings were without appeal. Yes, this meant that if someone else at your school attempted to mirror mathworld and got caught, you were banned from it until if and when your sysadmin managed to make nice with Eric.

According to the "detailed narrative" of the legal fiasco, Eric claims that those systems were put into place to appease CRC.

However, in November 1998, against my better judgment, I began to comply with Mr. Stern's request. At first I did this by randomly choosing a set of letters of the alphabet each day and blocking all entries starting with those letters. That way, some inconvenience was introduced into use of the web site, but no material remained blocked for long....this struck me as a poor device for dealing with irresponsible internet users who might attempt to bulk-download large portions of on-line material....If the problem was the user who wants to own a snapshot of the web site but, to avoid purchasing the CRC book, downloads major portions of the web site's content, then why not inconvenience only those exhibiting such patterns of use? So I began to improve my monitoring and access system

It sounds like the courts are saying that the right to publish a work in print does not carry along the right to publish electronically. If so, is it possible that the court's ruling in this matter will have any bearing on the Mathworld lawsuit? Maybe its a pointless question without seeing the contract betweeen CRC and Mr. Weisstein. I think the void left by Mathworld's absense is only slightly less significant than a 'hole' left in history as the editorial describes it.

• Stimulus: Hey, Mathworld is down! CRC Press is claiming ownership over the internet version of the work!

  Response: Greedy corporate bastards! Think they can take away our free content!

• Stimulus: Hey, the Supreme Court ruled that freelance authors have rights over the internet versions of their works!

  Response: Greedy author bastards! Think they can take away our free content!

Sigh.