25134Fw: Re: [PrimeNumbers] Re: Unknown Mathematician Proves Elusive Property of Prime Numbers
- May 31 9:45 AMFirst editorial remark: I obviously had some slip here in sending to one person in this group...apo.....
I, with the 'aid' of a worker at Burger King in transferring work to home (gift to buy coffee in here to avoid something else (?)), have formulated a 'Goldilocks' statement with bizarre punctuation at the end in a long string (pertaining to not favoring specific airlines, games, and using 'Not too hot and...') with only the name 'Sojourner Truth' in it (I had started with 'wannabe model because my...', but lost power and shifted to top of car in garage for power (and need to get back and inside)). It uses my timestamping procedure set to 10:30 today, and factors 3*13*113*571*P1240 (?!?! (hurried, may be off by 1)), with lead of '16' for the large one.
Should anybody want to prepare to confirm primality prior to my being able to do so (assistance in preventing some worst case), I expect to do this (place the statement and the long bizarre string in) early tomorrow at the latest.
Thank you. Thanks to people who have no idea or little of what I am am talking about if this blows a little strange. I think my reading of Hawthorne superstitiously (interior to the person downstairs and his doctoral field) indicates that there is a 4-city Nuclear Threat from communications difficulties that resolving 'haunted-house' issues may avert. My 'work' shows this is part of a cultural and environmental mandate with specific questions in abeyance in search of a better plan than might otherwise come out. A lot of this work has nothing to do with what is on surface reality.
So, I will settle this matter first with a send on the factorization to see the point (The point logically involves migration being necessitated for humans in a strange way now).
3*13*113*571*...sorry again David and thank you Juan.
James Guthrie Merickel
--- On Fri, 5/31/13, James Merickel <moralforce120@...> wrote:
From: James Merickel <moralforce120@...>
Subject: Re: [PrimeNumbers] Re: Unknown Mathematician Proves Elusive Property of Prime Numbers
To: "djbroadhurst" <d.broadhurst@...>
Date: Friday, May 31, 2013, 7:08 AM
No, but it appears the -2-marriage absolutely must be H.B. Carter (partner is Tim Burton). This is under conditions the law makes quick splits possible, and the objective is reduction by my gift of condemned property to a global tree-watching site without construction through the year 2023 (guesstimate). EXTREMELY FAST. Condemnation and purchase is my objective with half of her money gift to Temple University's Religion department for the plan analysis, the regift going to whatever proper healthcare facility belongs, most likely a clinic. This is months until 1, so that is 0 and negative 1 in between. I haven't cleared all hurdles on my end, but... The first married priest has to go the same as first male nun and then that and then before that Buddhist. Is.
--- On Fri, 5/31/13, djbroadhurst <d.broadhurst@...> wrote:
From: djbroadhurst <d.broadhurst@...>
Subject: [PrimeNumbers] Re: Unknown Mathematician Proves Elusive Property of Prime Numbers
Date: Friday, May 31, 2013, 4:08 AM
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org,
Phil Carmody <thefatphil@...> asked:
> Does anyone seriously doubt the TPC's truth?
Let's raise the stakes.
Does anyone seriously doubt the truth of the Bateman-Horn conjecture?
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]