Re: Partial difference equation, primes
From: C. Bond (cbond_at_ix.netcom.com)
Date: 08/22/04
- Next message: No Way: "Re: tossing coins"
- Previous message: Roger L. Bagula: "Re: A functional measure of roughness"
- In reply to: James Harris: "Re: Partial difference equation, primes"
- Next in thread: Marcel Martin: "Re: Partial difference equation, primes"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 14:42:09 GMT
James Harris wrote:
[snip]
> There is no other known in recorded history used to count prime
> numbers besides my dS(x,y) and yes, I'm talking about all of human
> history here.
>
> To me that's a simple enough claim that it should either be refutable
> by you sci.math'ers, or if you're sane, you'll quit trying to
> insinuate that it's not a big deal.
NOTE: Every article published in every math journal contains (or purports to contain) some unique, hitherto
unreported contribution. Otherwise the article would be redundant since it could be reduced to a simple
reference. There are thousands of novel results published yearly -- not all of which are big deals.
> James Harris
-- There are two things you must never attempt to prove: the unprovable -- and the obvious. -- Democracy: The triumph of popularity over principle. -- http://www.crbond.com
- Next message: No Way: "Re: tossing coins"
- Previous message: Roger L. Bagula: "Re: A functional measure of roughness"
- In reply to: James Harris: "Re: Partial difference equation, primes"
- Next in thread: Marcel Martin: "Re: Partial difference equation, primes"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
