Re: correcting Euclid's proof of the Infinitude of Primes which leads to an easy proof of the Infinitude of Twin Primes ...

From: "a_plutonium" <a_pluton...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
(Ah, the number one most infamous math-crank (IMO) has returned!)
In April of 2006 I finally nailed down the correct proof of the
Infinitude of Primes and the flaw of it.

That right there is a self-contradictory sentence. If it has a
flaw, then it can't be correct.

I was busy with physics and other sciences, ...

Oh wait, you're the number one most infamous science-crank, sorry.
No wait, you're the number one most infamous crank in both categories.
But does it really matter? You're **infamous**!!!

Heckman spends the next 9 months calling Archimedes Plutonium a
crank and crackpot.

Wow! I'll have to add Heckman to my list of heroes!

this is not becoming of a mathematics professor of Arizona State.

You're a bit out of date. This is not 18th century England where
people had to wear powdered wigs and assume airs to maintain
respect among peers. Nowadays people can engage in name-calling if
it's appropriate (truthful), as it is in this case (AP).
Perhaps instead of using ad hominem attacks, you might address the
issues. Perhaps further down this article you will?

I am going to repeat my proofs of Spring 2006 of Euclid's
Infinitude of Primes.

I don't need yours. The original was just fine. But I'll look at
yours to satisfy my curiosity whether you got it correct or not.

[Snipped personal attacks against *** Winter and Chris Heckman]

Well I reached the end of your article, and haven't seen any such
proof, so I guess instead of your usual tactic of posting flawed
proofs you are just playing bait and switch today. I'm ashamed of
you. You've lowered your already low standards.

whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

That's meaningless unless and until you translate it to e-prime.
.

Quantcast