Thursday, October 26, 2006

 

Math field, corrupted in late 1800's

The math field was corrupted in that late 1800's in number theory, when some rather intriguing mistakes were made leading to the acceptance of ideal theory.

The unfortunate response of mathematicians at the time was to declare the area "pure" and talk as if non-practicality were good!!!

That gave free rein for the error to propagate and opened the door for cons, people without consciences who learned how to talk math-ese, and work together, to maintain that wrong results not proven mathematically were correct.

Over a hundred years later, we have a system that is fully corrupted and capable of claiming just about anything, so no, Andrew Wiles did not prove FLT, and you can find all kinds of interesting problems and mistakes and amazing denial when it comes to important mathematical arguments, like, um, how many of you know of Plotnikov and his claims of proving P=NP?

After years of effort I just found a way to generalize the factoring problem.

Seems like no one noticed that

x^2 - y^2 = 0 mod T

was just a first step—a primitive case of a more generalized set of equations:

so add

S - 2xk = 0 mod T

and you have

(x+k)^2 = y^2 + S + k^2 + nT :

where you pick S, k and n, and n is just a difference from the other two equations.

Now that is just a damn good idea, but you won't hear mathematicians getting excited about it as they're cons in a corrupt system hoping to hold on to the lie of their supposed mathematical discoveries against the reality of mine, and the mistakes that entered into the field in the late 1800's.

Kind of dramatic eh?

I wish it were wrong. I kind of put up these equations hoping they are wrong, so I can focus on my other mathematical research without worrying about the fate of the world.

Proof against the field is its continuing to ignore this research. Time is part of my prosecutorial argument.

They knew, they bet the world, and they will lose. But remember, they put other people's lives on the line, and for what?

For math lies?





<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?