On Jul 2, 1:55=A0pm, plutonium.archime...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> 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 Plutoniumwww.iw.net/~a_plutonium
> whole entire Universe is just one big atom
> where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
|
