Re: Dumb arguments, and social stuff

From: W. Dale Hall (mailtowd-hall_at_pacbell.net)
Date: 10/16/04 

Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 00:31:52 GMT

Tim Smith wrote:

> In article <3c65f87.0410151536.492dbbef@posting.google.com>, James Harris wrote:
>
>>>>There is no counterexample. That's my point.
>>>
>>>Your "paper" states:
>>>
>>> Therefore, with the factorization
>>> 65x^3 - 12x + 1 = (a_1x + 1)(a_2x + 1)(a_3x + 1)
>>> one of the a's is coprime to 5.
>>>
>>>He shows that 8a^2+4a-45 divides both a and 5, where a is any of your a_1,
>>>a_2, or a_3. That's a counterexample to the claim that one of the a's is
>>>coprime to 5.
>>
>>You're a troll. The a's are algebraic integers.
>
>
> He shows that none of the a's are coprime to 5, by exhibiting common
> factors. Your paper claims that one of the a's is comprime to 5, implying
> no such common factor exists. Out here in reality, we call that a
> counterexample.
>

Actually, JSH is insisting that, despite the common factor, one such a_i
is coprime to 5. If he knew about ideals, or even held the ideas in mind
for a few moments, he would see the contradiction I've laid out on many
occasions. However, he cannot find the error in his work that leads to a
contradiction, so he refuses to believe his own eyes.

Dale.

Quantcast