On definition of Charisma

[questfortruth]

To pass the appointed job interview (or to make a good impression on a date) is
easy: the chance is about 70 % based on your skills in CV. But the previous
100 analogous interviews were fallen through (without a known reason), then
your expectancy to get the dream job is just one percent 1/100=1 % or even less.
The difference between 70 % and 1 % is explained by (bad) Luck. Bad Luck is
also known as Negative Charisma.

These are the most straightforward proofs of Luck, abc, Riemann, and many research tasks.
https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.12946.73923
It is Nihilism to reply "there are no proofs'' without the report of mistakes.
F. Nietzsche defines Nihilism as rejecting an obvious truth, like 2+2=4.
I have proofs because I was trying to write math proofs, not a description how to castrate a cat or something.

 

[Spirit of Light]

To pass the appointed job interview (or to make a good impression on a date) is
easy: the chance is about 70 % based on your skills in CV. But the previous
100 analogous interviews were fallen through (without a known reason), then
your expectancy to get the dream job is just one percent 1/100=1 % or even less.
The difference between 70 % and 1 % is explained by (bad) Luck. Bad Luck is
also known as Negative Charisma.

These are the most straightforward proofs of Luck, abc, Riemann, and many research tasks.
https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.12946.73923
It is Nihilism to reply "there are no proofs'' without the report of mistakes.
F. Nietzsche defines Nihilism as rejecting an obvious truth, like 2+2=4.
I have proofs because I was trying to write proofs, not to castrate a cat or something.

If you are the only one seeing your paper as "proof" of what you say in your papers, but others do not find your work to prove anything.

Are your work still a proof then?
Or proof only to your self?

 

[questfortruth]

If you are the only one seeing your paper as "proof" of what you say in your papers, but others do not find your work to prove anything.

Are your work still a proof then?
Or proof only to your self?

There is your report of mistakes then? I repeat:

It is Nihilism to reply "there are no proofs'' without the report of mistakes.

 

[Spirit of Light]

There is your report of mistakes then? I repeat:

It is Nihilism to reply "there are no proofs'' without the report of mistakes.

If there is not proof in your paper to be found, is it wrong to point it out to you?
I personally can't find anything in your paper that i find truth in ( that is a personal comment, not an attack on you as a person)

You take critizism of your work as if it was an personal vendeta...it isnt

 

[questfortruth]

If there is not proof in your paper to be found

Tell me one thing to be sure: my paper tells how to castrate cats?

I have proofs because I was trying to write math proofs, not a description how to castrate a cat or something.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Tell me one thing to be sure: my paper tells how to castrate cats?

I have proofs because I was trying to write proofs, not to castrate a cat or something.

Your paper isnt about cats....its about a theory

 

[questfortruth]

Your paper isnt about cats....its about a theory

What about theory? Has my paper word Proof?

 

[Spirit of Light]

What about theory? Has my paper word Proof?

Just because you write the word proof does not mean it is an actual proof

 

[questfortruth]

Just because you write the word proof does not mean it is an actual proof

Tell me at least one mistake then.

It is Nihilism to reply "there are no proofs'' without the report of mistakes.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Tell me at least one mistake then.

It is Nihilism to reply "there are no proofs'' without the report of mistakes.

If i cant find any proof (that i see as proof) in your writing at all....how can i pick one thing?

Have you gotten it published in a science publication that are well known? I dont mean researchgate. But a highly professional publicator?

 

[ChristineM]

To pass the appointed job interview (or to make a good impression on a date) is
easy: the chance is about 70 % based on your skills in CV. But the previous
100 analogous interviews were fallen through (without a known reason), then
your expectancy to get the dream job is just one percent 1/100=1 % or even less.
The difference between 70 % and 1 % is explained by (bad) Luck. Bad Luck is
also known as Negative Charisma.

These are the most straightforward proofs of Luck, abc, Riemann, and many research tasks.
https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.12946.73923
It is Nihilism to reply "there are no proofs'' without the report of mistakes.
F. Nietzsche defines Nihilism as rejecting an obvious truth, like 2+2=4.
I have proofs because I was trying to write math proofs, not a description how to castrate a cat or something.

An employer will hire the best person for the job. Think on this

 

[questfortruth]

Have you gotten it published in a science

And it is unpublished yet, but valid proof until the mistakes would be reported.

 

[Spirit of Light]

And it is unpublished yet, but valid proof until the mistakes would be reported.

I will wait until you try publish it...

 

[questfortruth]

I will wait until you try publish it...

Funny part is what the journal offices are replying in the exact same way as you here:

You have no Proofs, not because we have report of mistakes, but because we do not trust you. We trust only famous authors, Professors of Math. The famous scientific problems are not for you. They are for famous, established authors only.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Funny part is what the journal offices are replying in the exact same way as you here:

You have no Proofs, not because we have report of mistakes, but because we do not trust you. We trust only famous authors, Professors of Math. The famous scientific problems are not for you. They are for famous, established authors only.

I have never asked you to trust me, all i giving you is my honest personal opinion on your work.

And again you take my eord as an insult, I have no pleasure in insulting you, all RF is about is sharing opinion about tooics in discussion or debate.

You can handle discussion about your work can't you?

 

[questfortruth]

You can handle discussion about your work can't you?

I am not a villain in this discussion. I am not son of Putin.

 

[KWED]

To pass the appointed job interview (or to make a good impression on a date) is
easy: the chance is about 70 % based on your skills in CV. But the previous
100 analogous interviews were fallen through (without a known reason), then
your expectancy to get the dream job is just one percent 1/100=1 % or even less.
The difference between 70 % and 1 % is explained by (bad) Luck. Bad Luck is
also known as Negative Charisma.

These are the most straightforward proofs of Luck, abc, Riemann, and many research tasks.
https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.12946.73923
It is Nihilism to reply "there are no proofs'' without the report of mistakes.
F. Nietzsche defines Nihilism as rejecting an obvious truth, like 2+2=4.
I have proofs because I was trying to write math proofs, not a description how to castrate a cat or something.

Hey, don't give up dude. There's someone out there for everyone.
Just ask about them about themselves, show interest, and don't bang on about your "genius proofs" and such.

 

[Spirit of Light]

I am not a villain in this discussion. I am not son of Putin.

For crying out loud....did i ever call you a villain? Did i ever call you a son of Putin?

 

[questfortruth]

Hey, don't give up dude. There's someone out there for everyone.
Just ask about them about themselves, show interest, and don't bang on about your "genius proofs" and such.

knock and the door will be opened to you Matthew 7:7 NIV

Why does it not open? I am knocking during 40 years.

 

[Spirit of Light]

knock and the door will be opened to you Matthew 7:7 NIV

Why does it not open? I am knocking during 40 years.

Did God ask you to use science to open the door to heaven? I think you would find the door if you only followed Gods teaching and not human teaching through science