Re: JSH: Mystery increases

JSH wrote:
I was actually very surprised at the arguments that ensued over my
solution to the factoring problem.

Why should you be? Your explanations were very vague, and you seem to have given short shrift to the key points of the algorithm.

Your original specification illuminated a very bright warning light when you dictated that all of your extraneous variables could have a single, uniform value chosen for them to solve the problem--in other words, you essentially had that a non-trivial factor of d is f(d) for a rather simple f.

Your original specification essentially states "any v would work." Now, your current statements require that you need to minimize some function of v (the exact one is not clear). If your solution is so correct, why need you change it so often? Either you really suck at explaining stuff, or it's not correct.

It is a very simple argument with a rather basic proof, so why were
posters so diligent in throwing up distractions around it, or in
making false statements?

The way I see it: you introduced new variables into the equations. This introduction can introduce "fake" answers into the equation, a topic you didn't deal with at first. It was only after people actually did a brute-force analysis showing that your equations didn't always work that you changed your statements.

I have YEARS of having had major mathematical discoveries and learned
a long time ago that proof wasn't enough to convince people in the
mathematical community, but I didn't realize just how bad it truly is.

I am not qualified to speak about most of your results, but the one I feel most qualified to speak on, your attempt to prove P = NP, I had a strong feeling from you: your proofs were based on "it feels right," as opposed to fully rigorous derivations. It appears to be mostly intuitions that you claim proved you correct; intuitions about your algorithms led me to suspect gaping holes.

Mathematical proof has not only routinely been denied, people have
behaved as if it would always be, and even now with the factoring
problem itself solved they have continued.

This is "proof" under your definition, right? Again, most of what I have seen you post does not fall under the my definition: a rigorous step-by-step proof with case analysis. If you want people to accept your proofs, go write them up in Coq and show that the formal proof is, in fact, correct.

The mystery is well beyond the bizarre. Like you people destroyed a
mathematical journal. You've ignored incredible and dramatic
proofs.

[Citation needed]. Honestly, you've provided at best circumstantial evidence that would be difficult to accept even under the burdens of a civil court, let alone "beyond reasonable doubt." An outsider who claims to be able to refute 100-year old cornerstones of mathematics is more likely to be wrong than right.

And, honestly, your conspiracy theories fail Occam's Razor pretty badly.

And now with the factoring problem solved the entire Internet will be
affected, but some of you STILL continue with the same behavior?

[Citation needed].

Do any of you actually believe in mathematical proof?

Sure, just not "proof" as you define it.

--
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: JSH: Of course theyre lying
    ... The reason for me picking the factoring problem is that the lies ... Your group claims to care about mathematics, ... "Understanding Godel isn't about following his formal proof. ...
    (sci.math)
  • JSH: Of course theyre lying
    ... The reason for me picking the factoring problem is that the lies ... ALL of the other posters have come in line with his original claims. ... However, I know they will simply turn to some new lie, so I pause to ... Your group claims to care about mathematics, ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: JSH Of course theyre lying
    ... The reason for me picking the factoring problem is that the lies ... However, They know I will simply turn to some new lie, so they pause to ... My group claims to care about mathematics, ... I hate mathematics, ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: JSH: Factoring problem, trivial?
    ... The mathematics is so much less complicated than anything else I've ... then the factoring problem is one of the easiest to ... Now to the meat of it ...
    (sci.crypt)
Loading