Perlman really did some outstanding work on this one and the main stream Mathematics comunity backs him up. It is strange that Yua, a fields medalist himself, who has experienced truth on a deeper level than the vast majority of the population can not see the truth of his own behavior.
So, this study tells us that the only way to have a chance to become friends is if you actually have some interaction with another person? Brilliant!
Sorry to break it to you all, but this is the way that real theoretical scientists get thier funding. By pretending to be doing some applied experiment when what they are really doing is studying some great theory. The US funding sources are so short sighted that the scientist resort to this kind of thing and we get lots of these silly reports.
Genius is Relative, pun intended. Pythagoras was considered a genius, but what he discovered is considered junior high school level science today. The same holds true for Archimedes. People seem to be a genius be only compared to those around them. The one thing that most people will never understand is that people who are labeled "genius" are rarely trying to be one nor care if they are. The discover things because they are curious, because they are compelled. They never ask, "What can I do with this?" What can I blow up or how do I sell this?" It is always the simple minded less creative people that find a way to make a fortune off a real genius's ideas. If you are wondering if you are a genius, stop and just get on with the task of discovery!
The article raises a very old question, as they pointed out; it has a historical reference at least as old as Plato. I agree with some of the assertions made by the team from the university in France. However, if there test was made up of similar pictorial questions as are posted in there article on MSNBC, there are significant flaws in their research. Notice in the second set of diagrams that the one in the lower right is the only shape that is convex! This could also be a legitimate response. As far as the last set of images, these bare a striking resemblance to patterns one could encounter on insect, such as butterflies. We have no information on the cultural relevance these people give to such markings and as such they may choose the one that has some spiritual taboo in their society. It is clear that the team must include a mathematician, i.e. Geometer, and a cultural anthropologist that is an expert in such areas. Although I agree with the findings of this study, the work that is published makes me believe it should be classified as junk science.
Slashdot Mirror
Perlman really did some outstanding work on this one and the main stream Mathematics comunity backs him up. It is strange that Yua, a fields medalist himself, who has experienced truth on a deeper level than the vast majority of the population can not see the truth of his own behavior.
So, this study tells us that the only way to have a chance to become friends is if you actually have some interaction with another person? Brilliant! Sorry to break it to you all, but this is the way that real theoretical scientists get thier funding. By pretending to be doing some applied experiment when what they are really doing is studying some great theory. The US funding sources are so short sighted that the scientist resort to this kind of thing and we get lots of these silly reports.
How in the heck does a stupid story like this make it onto slashdot, let alone the science section, what crap!
Genius is Relative, pun intended. Pythagoras was considered a genius, but what he discovered is considered junior high school level science today. The same holds true for Archimedes. People seem to be a genius be only compared to those around them. The one thing that most people will never understand is that people who are labeled "genius" are rarely trying to be one nor care if they are. The discover things because they are curious, because they are compelled. They never ask, "What can I do with this?" What can I blow up or how do I sell this?" It is always the simple minded less creative people that find a way to make a fortune off a real genius's ideas. If you are wondering if you are a genius, stop and just get on with the task of discovery!
The article raises a very old question, as they pointed out; it has a historical reference at least as old as Plato. I agree with some of the assertions made by the team from the university in France. However, if there test was made up of similar pictorial questions as are posted in there article on MSNBC, there are significant flaws in their research. Notice in the second set of diagrams that the one in the lower right is the only shape that is convex! This could also be a legitimate response. As far as the last set of images, these bare a striking resemblance to patterns one could encounter on insect, such as butterflies. We have no information on the cultural relevance these people give to such markings and as such they may choose the one that has some spiritual taboo in their society. It is clear that the team must include a mathematician, i.e. Geometer, and a cultural anthropologist that is an expert in such areas. Although I agree with the findings of this study, the work that is published makes me believe it should be classified as junk science.