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

Re: [PrimeNumbers] Demichel

Expand Messages
  • Phil Carmody
    ... Maths by guesswork? What happened to rigour? Then again, seeing how long those two take to get from 24/8 to 3, I suspect that the papers will be closely
    Message 1 of 8 , Jan 2 6:56 AM
      --- On Sun, 1/2/11, Andrey Kulsha wrote:
      > > e^(iwy)    e^(iwy)   e^(-iwy)
      > > ------- =  ------- + --------
      > >    p        B + iy    B - iy
      >
      >     I guess they mean the conjugated pair of zeta zeros.

      Maths by guesswork? What happened to rigour? Then again, seeing how long those two take to get from 24/8 to 3, I suspect that the papers will be closely associated with rigor mortis.

      Phil
    • Kermit Rose
      _ ... Shows that that dissertation did not have careful proofreading. http://primes.utm.edu/howmany.shtml However in 1914 Littlewood proved that pi(x)-Li(x)
      Message 2 of 8 , Jan 2 11:38 AM
        _
        > 3d. Re: Demichel
        > Posted by: "Phil Carmody" thefatphil@... thefatphil
        > Date: Sun Jan 2, 2011 4:32 am ((PST))
        >
        > --- On Sun, 1/2/11, Andrey Kulsha wrote:
        >> There are also two new (very similar, huh)
        >> papers analyzing and improving these results:
        >> http://eprints.ma.man.ac.uk/1541/01/Munibah2010.pdf
        >
        > "In 1914, numerical evidence proved that π(x)< li(x) for all x. "
        >
        > Ewww...
        >
        > Phil
        >

        Shows that that dissertation did not have careful proofreading.

        http://primes.utm.edu/howmany.shtml

        However in 1914 Littlewood proved that pi(x)-Li(x) assumes both positive
        and negative values infinitely often.

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