jef@LBL-RTSG.ARPA (03/18/86)
I saw your message in SF-LOVERS on "Flight of the Dragonfly". I thought it was a flame, but of course I'm biased about this particular book, so I showed it to a friend. He said, "This is a flame." No one to my knowlege has accused you of being an ignoramus. Many people have accused you of being a flamer. I don't see how you can expect to be treated like the intelligent adult you seem to be, while you continue to spout content-free flames. Please civilize yourself, Mr. Smith. --- Jef
weemba@brahms.BERKELEY.EDU (Matthew P. Wiener) (03/18/86)
In article <37378.511513442@lbl-rtsg.arpa> jef@LBL-RTSG.ARPA writes: >I saw your message in SF-LOVERS on "Flight of the Dragonfly". >I thought it was a flame, but of course I'm biased about this >particular book, so I showed it to a friend. He said, "This is >a flame." > >No one to my knowlege has accused you of being an ignoramus. >Many people have accused you of being a flamer. I don't see >how you can expect to be treated like the intelligent adult >you seem to be, while you continue to spout content-free flames. > >Please civilize yourself, Mr. Smith. As one of the co-authors of the review in question, I would like to inform you that it was not content-free. We are both mathematicians, and our analysis from a mathematical point of view happens to be dead ACCURATE. If you don't believe me, then go ahead, ACTUALLY learn something about abelian varieties, the continuum hypothesis, the three body problem etc. and THEN tell us that our review was content-free. Why do you think we cross-posted to net.math? At the very least, go check out George Gamow. If you want sci-fi with some iota of mathematical accuracy, read Rudy Rucker. I can't for reasons of style--he makes me sick--but RR does know his mathematics. Gene is damn familiar with sci-fi, and I am not, if that makes any difference. He read the whole book, and I just read the good parts. We read the passages to our mathematical friends, and their reaction also was one of complete derision. If stating an opinion on the net is by definition a flame, then Gene and I will continue to flame forever. If you happen to be a member of the cult who gets annoyed at the phrase "sci-fi", that's just too bad. And if Robert Forward happens to be one of your idols, that's just too bad. WE don't worship idols, and WE don't believe most sci-fi writers know beans vis-a-vis science. We could review other authors if we wanted to, but Forward seems to have this unearned reputation for knowing what he's talking about, so that's why HIS book was singled out. For your information, his physics is pretty weak too. ucbvax!brahms!weemba Matthew P Wiener/UCB Math Dept/Berkeley CA 94720