Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Primes and a Liouville number...

Expand Messages
  • maximilian_hasler
    ... equations (ii & iii) on... ... (...) ... I just had a glance at the page, and think it is nonsense. The chi(p) function isn t a function, neither are
    Message 1 of 2 , Sep 7, 2009
      --- In primenumbers@yahoogroups.com, "antidyne" <antidyne@...> wrote:
      > I was wondering if anyone in here could confirm or invalidate that
      equations (ii & iii) on...
      > http://www.jeffreyncook.com/jeff%20cook%20physics/NET/net%2001.htm
      (...)
      > Also, any second set of eyes of the rest would be much helpful.

      I just had a glance at the page, and think it is nonsense.

      The chi(p) "function" isn't a function, neither are there primes raised
      to the negative power of 10. (And IMO the appearance of "10" is also a
      sign of irrelevance.)
      Skipping to equation (x) at the bottom of the page, which reads:

      > What is absolutely certain, and straightforwardly solved for,
      > whether the conjecture is true or not is that the following is true:
      > XXX * ( XXX + i alpha/XXX )^(-1) = 0.999... + alpha i
      > Where the Imaginary part of the result equals the Fine Structure
      Constant.

      I think everyone who followed a first introduction to calculus can judge
      the value of this statement and "result".
      The value 10^kappa * tau of XXX is completely irrelevant here,
      and makes me think that the rest of the page is equally worthless.

      Maximilian
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.