malc...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>
> I have had a lot of fun reading all this stuff. I have also read
> http://groups.google.com.by/group/sci.logic/msg/a6235d5653d6af68
>
> I think that what Hardy had in mind is that since natural numbers are
> well ordered, to prove the infinitude of primes you just need to prove
> that the subset of all prime numbers greater than any given prime is
> not empty. This and the reductio ad absurdum proof are both based on
> the construction of the number 'product of primes plus one', so it is
> normal to somehow 'confuse' them, being each of them correct in their
> own.
>
> Mathematicians do not normally write formal proofs but instead they
> sort of describe them; they tell us how we should be able to write a
> formal proof. This being understood, it is normal that whenever we
> talk about things we know and understand well we make mistakes in our
> discourse which, from a pragmatic point of view, can perfectly be
> ignored without any damage. So giving any im****tance to that kind of
> mistakes doesn't make anyone any sort of genius.
>
> By the way, why should these strange looking ......13121110987654321
> be a prime?
>
> Cheers.
You have a touch of what I call the Jesse Hughes syndrome as
illustrated in the
Argus Leader news story of Archimedes Plutonium. This is a syndrome of
where
you hate someone and the hatred then never allows you to acknowledge
the
achievements of the person you hate. You belittle, you ignore, you
dismiss,
you attack the person, and no matter how high of a achievement, how
im****tant
the achievement, you simply can never acknowledge it.
And I believe that such a condition are the signs that the person is
no longer fit to
be in education or the science.
Imagine a professor on campus who hates a s****ts person, and who in
the weekend
won the game for the hometeam. And the professor failing to
acknowledge the achievements
of the s****ts person.
Perhaps the prime reason we have "educators" is for the moment in
which they can congratulate
those who have achieved something academically or physically. And when
we see educators
full of hatred who cannot for a single moment acknowledge the
achievement of others, is time,
I believe for them to be pushed out of education since they do more
harm than what little good.
I have discovered there is a LOGICAL flaw in most renditions of the
Euclid Infinitude of Primes Proof.
I have written a book and published it on the Internet showing where
many textbooks on math
give an invalid proof of Infinitude of Primes. Hardy's book A
Mathematicians Apology is one amoung
30 that fails to give a valid proof of Infinitude of Primes.
It is a "big mistake". And not as Malcolm wants to dream is a minor
mistake. For Malcolm is acting
more like Jesse Hughes, in his hatred of Archimedes Plutonium, that
you deny me of my achievement.
If you taught a group of Grade School Children how to add and these
children learn it for the first time
and then you quized them with a sum such as this:
Add this column:
3
5
10
9
____
And 30 Grade school children handed in their answer and 28 of them
summed to 18
while two of the children summed to 27.
Then both Malcolm and Jesse Hughes should congratulate those two who
had the correct
answer of 27. And even if they hated the guts of those two, should
still congratulate them.
Likewise.
What I should as a fundamental mistake of logic reasoning performed by
a group of 30
math professors which included Montgomery in a Number theory textbook
and include
Hardy in A Mathematicians Apology and included Conway and many other
math professors
is akin to adding the above list and coming up with 18.
The mistake that Hardy makes as well as thirty other professors of
mathematics is that
they commit themselves to a Reductio Ad Absurdum proof, but fail to
apply the "definition
of prime" that forces them to recognize that the new number has to be
prime also. That if
3 and 5 were the only primes that exist, then 16 is also a prime
number in this universe of
all primes. That is the mistake made by nearly everyone who has
written a Euclid Infinitude of
Primes proof in a book.
It is a big mistake, just as the Grade Schoolers added 10 as if it
were a 1 and arrived at 18
instead of the correct answer of 27.
So for Malcolm and Jesse Hughes to continue to belittle and ignore and
lambast my accomplishements
to never accept my achievements, reflects more on your hatemongering.
If any handful of pipsqueck professors of mathematics had corrected
Hardy and a group of 30
professors of their tainted and invalid attempt of Euclid Infinitude
of Primes, they would have been
touted around the world as the new genius. But because it was
Archimedes Plutonium who
accomplished this, the world only rises up to spew more hatred and
suppression of the man
who discovered the Atom Totality theory.
Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
|
