Having skimmed through the paper accessible at the end of the first link, I am leaning towards (1). It contains a barrage of eye-assaulting notation, lots of digressions and repetition, and basically no formal substance (which, for a logic/computation paper, is bizarre).
> Sorry that mathematical notation is causing you problems
For somebody who elsewhere in this thread literally asked HN discussion participants to "not degrade into personal attacks" this was an unbelievably arrogant remark.
What about giving us some summary on how the overall community of researchers in the theory of computation area are thinking of your breakthrough insights? I'm sure there are some CS Ph.D.s in here that are interested in some context.
I suggest you bring the discussion to the appropriate academic forums like conferences and workshops. Doing this via wikipedia and hacker news instead makes it look like your academic peers have decided it's not worth their time so that you are coming here instead.
Once the academic community with researchers in the same field accepts your breakthrough results, it will be easier to convince us that it's legit. And it will come here all by itself, without you having to do active promotion.
