a****a
发帖数: 16 | | R******o
发帖数: 1572 | | L*********s
发帖数: 3063 | 3 Peter Woit says:
November 26, 2013 at 12:34 pm
Curious,
I saw the document from Sen Hu you link to a few months ago, decided at the
time that it wasn’t a good idea to mention it on the blog. This was because
it seemed rather one-sided, and it was not clear at all that it was written
by someone expert enough in the technicalities and their history.
The Chen-Donaldson-Sun document did seem worth mentioning, since, while it
may be one-sided, it’s an authoritative representation of the views of some
of the principals in the the story. I’m glad to see that Tian has also
given his point of view. Hearing what they have to say directly from both
sides involved in this is a lot better than getting a one-sided argument
from some third party. So, at this point I don’t see anything particularly
useful about the Sen Hu document.
【在 a****a 的大作中提到】
: http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=6430
| L*********s
发帖数: 3063 | 4 Peter Woit says:
November 26, 2013 at 12:34 pm
Curious,
I saw the document from Sen Hu you link to a few months ago, decided at the
time that it wasn’t a good idea to mention it on the blog. This was because
it seemed rather one-sided, and it was not clear at all that it was written
by someone expert enough in the technicalities and their history.
The Chen-Donaldson-Sun document did seem worth mentioning, since, while it
may be one-sided, it’s an authoritative representation of the views of some
of the principals in the the story. I’m glad to see that Tian has also
given his point of view. Hearing what they have to say directly from both
sides involved in this is a lot better than getting a one-sided argument
from some third party. So, at this point I don’t see anything particularly
useful about the Sen Hu document.
【在 a****a 的大作中提到】
: http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=6430
| L*********s
发帖数: 3063 | 5 双方当事人的credit不好判断，这个胡森就一小丑啊
the
because
written
★ 发自iPhone App: ChineseWeb 7.8
【在 L*********s 的大作中提到】
: Peter Woit says:
: November 26, 2013 at 12:34 pm
: Curious,
: I saw the document from Sen Hu you link to a few months ago, decided at the
: time that it wasn’t a good idea to mention it on the blog. This was because
: it seemed rather one-sided, and it was not clear at all that it was written
: by someone expert enough in the technicalities and their history.
: The Chen-Donaldson-Sun document did seem worth mentioning, since, while it
: may be one-sided, it’s an authoritative representation of the views of some
: of the principals in the the story. I’m glad to see that Tian has also
| n******t
发帖数: 4406 | |
|
