Re: I was right, surrogate factoring proof

tomstdenis_at_gmail.com
Date: 02/16/05 

Date: 16 Feb 2005 05:43:41 -0800

jstevh@msn.com wrote:
> I'm in a weird mood today so I'm answering a lot of these posts.

You should. You start these threads to discuss your stuff. The least
you could do is reply.

> First off, my post actually includes a theorem, which comes in at the
> end, not stated at the beginning, which is just a convention.

It's a nonsensical convention once you learn what a theorem ACTUALLY
is.

> I wonder about your statement claiming certain expression may or may
> not be equivalent, as that's an actual mathematical statement, which
> you embedded in a lot of chatter, and it's provably false.

No, you can't always write "it's a mathematical statement". That just
doesn't cut it. At some point you have to do some work and actually
prove your statements with a properly organized proof.

> I say, if you wish to make a challenge to my proof, then challenge
the
> proof.

Um, I have. In an earlier post I questioned the definition of your
variables, field and the lack of any proof for various "clearly"
statements.

> The math is at the level of what in America is typically called high
> school, or in Europe secondary school mathematics.

I'm sorry what? In high school it's expected that the students
understand the scientific process. Something you clearly haven't done.
 Pride in "re-inventing" the convention is the hubris of the
uneducated.

> There does not need to be a lot of verbiage. There is not room for
> error to hide.

Um, there is plenty of room. Specially since you didn't define any of
your variables.

I don't know what your problem is. Just write a proper algorithm,
theorem and proof and I'll stop asking you to write a proper algorithm,
theorem and proof.

If you are so excited in your newfangled ideas you'd take a vested
interest in presenting them the best you can. If the best a fully
grown adult male like you can do is some pre-school abhorrent
presentation then maybe you should investigate the "truth" of the
situation more.

Your actions are basically like those of a six year old that wants to
play in the "grown up" world but doesn't understand the rules. So you
pout and cry and stomp your feet. The net result is the grown-up still
ignore you.

> Chatter is a waste of time here.

Bingo.

> If you have a challenge to the proof, make it directly.

Ok fine. You have yet to write a formally acceptable theorem and
proof. I therefore challenge that your claim of polynomial time
factoring is a lie.

What say you now?

Tom

Quantcast