Wednesday, June 12, 2002
JSH: In case you still haven't realized certain things.
Many of you are quite comfortable with the opinion that I'm just some "crank".
However, you need to consider some facts.
I started from scratch a little over seven years ago looking for a short, simple proof of Fermat's Last Theorem. Ok, so I don't have a simple proof (see, I admit it), but it IS short, and I think it'd be hard for those of you who are paying attention to believe that the short proof has some obvious error in it, when all these people are fiddling around with polynomials of degree 18 to consider an assumption of mine that would have applied to the p=3 case, if that assumption were correct. (And it was MY assumption mind you as I've directed things far more than you may realize.)
That is, IF there were some error in the proof, it'd be far easier to simply pounce on the error than worry about whether or not some degree 18 polynomial was reducible or not.
Ok, so maybe that doesn't grab you.
Well then, what about the prime counting function?
If you did your research, or know about prime counting, then you know that most of the established methods use sieves. You then probably also know that the only other perfect counting method that doesn't depend on Riemann's hypothesis uses n * int((n-1)!/n), which happens to equal 0 for composites and 1 for primes.
That makes the little function that I so casually gave to you in a Java program the ONLY other known difference function that counts primes.
That little function escaped humanity for over two thousand years.
(Want to see something odd? Look at Wolfram Research's page on prime counting. I assure you it didn't look this way before I posted the prime counting function. It looks like they're waiting for something, unless they've just gone bonkers at the implications. http://mathworld.wolfram.com/PrimeCountingFunction.html.)
Still doesn't grab you?
Still think I'm a "crank"?
Yeah right, I doubt it. Those of you still wondering about that aren't people I'm focusing on anyway.
And I'm STILL holding mathematics in the wings, as I think I have an angle on Goldbach's Conjecture. But that's one thing you don't get to hear any more about now.
I told you once before that the Universe has a sense of humor. I've also told you that She has a temper.
I think Her good humor is at its limit.
She didn't put me here just for some of you to get your jollies from insulting me, or for the majority of you to ignore me.
That should be very clear to you now.
And I'm not making claims on what I've discovered, as if it were really about me. It's not. It's all been SHOWN to me, for a purpose.
Sure that may sound VERY cranky to you, but given what has already been revealed, do you really want to bet your life on it?
However, you need to consider some facts.
I started from scratch a little over seven years ago looking for a short, simple proof of Fermat's Last Theorem. Ok, so I don't have a simple proof (see, I admit it), but it IS short, and I think it'd be hard for those of you who are paying attention to believe that the short proof has some obvious error in it, when all these people are fiddling around with polynomials of degree 18 to consider an assumption of mine that would have applied to the p=3 case, if that assumption were correct. (And it was MY assumption mind you as I've directed things far more than you may realize.)
That is, IF there were some error in the proof, it'd be far easier to simply pounce on the error than worry about whether or not some degree 18 polynomial was reducible or not.
Ok, so maybe that doesn't grab you.
Well then, what about the prime counting function?
If you did your research, or know about prime counting, then you know that most of the established methods use sieves. You then probably also know that the only other perfect counting method that doesn't depend on Riemann's hypothesis uses n * int((n-1)!/n), which happens to equal 0 for composites and 1 for primes.
That makes the little function that I so casually gave to you in a Java program the ONLY other known difference function that counts primes.
That little function escaped humanity for over two thousand years.
(Want to see something odd? Look at Wolfram Research's page on prime counting. I assure you it didn't look this way before I posted the prime counting function. It looks like they're waiting for something, unless they've just gone bonkers at the implications. http://mathworld.wolfram.com/PrimeCountingFunction.html.)
Still doesn't grab you?
Still think I'm a "crank"?
Yeah right, I doubt it. Those of you still wondering about that aren't people I'm focusing on anyway.
And I'm STILL holding mathematics in the wings, as I think I have an angle on Goldbach's Conjecture. But that's one thing you don't get to hear any more about now.
I told you once before that the Universe has a sense of humor. I've also told you that She has a temper.
I think Her good humor is at its limit.
She didn't put me here just for some of you to get your jollies from insulting me, or for the majority of you to ignore me.
That should be very clear to you now.
And I'm not making claims on what I've discovered, as if it were really about me. It's not. It's all been SHOWN to me, for a purpose.
Sure that may sound VERY cranky to you, but given what has already been revealed, do you really want to bet your life on it?
# posted by James Harris @ 19:48 
