Re: surrogate factoring eqns are wrong
From: Jim Spriggs (jim.sprigs_at_ANTISPAMbtinternet.com.invalid)
Date: 02/18/05
- Next message: Christian Bau: "Re: Easy test of surrogate factoring"
- Previous message: OsherD: "Re: Modern physics and refutation of nihilism"
- In reply to: rickO: "Re: surrogate factoring eqns are wrong"
- Next in thread: guenther.vonKnakspott_at_gmx.de: "Re: surrogate factoring eqns are wrong"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 21:51:11 +0000 (UTC)
rickO wrote:
>
> "Schweinkolben" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<37l1qvF5fv3sqU1@individual.net>...
> > These equations were previously published in the 1930's by Ivan Melch, in a
> > German book titled "Functions Theory" by Fischkopf Press. Melch has them as
> > only a side note on page 137 as part of his derivation of the famous
> > Gebratener Speck theory. Melch uses Z, a complex quantity instead of the
> > oversimplified real number A. The equations were also shown to be irrelevant
> > for either surrogate factoring, or random number generation.
> >
>
> I've never heard of the "Fried Bacon Theorem". What does it say?
Is it related to the Ham Sandwich Theorem?
- Next message: Christian Bau: "Re: Easy test of surrogate factoring"
- Previous message: OsherD: "Re: Modern physics and refutation of nihilism"
- In reply to: rickO: "Re: surrogate factoring eqns are wrong"
- Next in thread: guenther.vonKnakspott_at_gmx.de: "Re: surrogate factoring eqns are wrong"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
