Re: JSH: Finally! They're caught.
- From: JSH <jstevh@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2009 15:35:55 -0700 (PDT)
On Mar 29, 12:45 pm, Enrico <ungerne...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 29, 12:06 pm, JSH <jst...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 29, 10:27 am, Enrico <ungerne...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 29, 10:48 am, JSH <jst...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Now readers can finally see clearly what I've had to face for years:
some of those among you are anti-knowledge.
It has been so frustrating watching these people get away with it for
years. And now the result that proves my point by how they react to
it.
Notice, they have all the warnings too!!! Yet they still are fighting
it. That is telling.
It is such a beautiful mathematical result too. A family of three
equations connected to Pell's Equation, where primes come in as well
with D being prime, where they are EASIER to solve.
That creates a story where none of the old lies and manipulating
techniques they use can hold.
But some of them are trying anyway which is an expression of contempt
for you.
I don't think they see most of you as being anything but their tools.
They've ruled you for so long that they have no respect for your
intelligence.
Yup. They've RULED you. That's why they fight so hard.
You have been slaves in mind, if not in body.
You have been servants to a class of people who have nothing but
contempt for you.
James Harris
=======================================================================
It is such a beautiful mathematical result too. A family of three
equations connected to Pell's Equation, where primes come in as well
with D being prime, where they are EASIER to solve.
Given: 29718^2 - 61*3805^2 = -1
Show me how your equations are used to find
a solution to the more difficult:
X^2 -61*Y^2 = 1
Enrico
The equation is:
x = 2Dk^2 - 1 and x = 2j^2 + 1
so x = 1766319049.
I'm more curious though about how long it takes to solve for the
negative Pell's Equation using continued fractions versus Pell's
Equation.
That is coming up as a research question.
James Harris- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
===================================================================
Ah. So it really does work - transforming a relatively easy
solution into the solution of a difficult one.
The reason I asked about D=61 was that it was a challenge
problem posed by Fermat in the mid 1600's.
I don't find any references in the history to someone
easily picking off the solution - It would have been
noteworthy. (I only looked at one site:)
http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/HistTopics/Pell.html
Enrico
Yeah. Turns out that you can actually--I think--do a simple search
using about roughly 4 checks? I'm guessing as I'm saving this path
for if necessary. Some weirdos are still fighting me, is that a bad
trend? Will math society try to continue the Math Wars?
The small number is because you're searching mod 61.
There are two things emerging from these solutions:
1. Mathematics is wonderful, beautiful and there are always
surprises.
2. There are some weird people on these newsgroups who either have
just mentally snapped, from their replies, or somehow they were
masquerading at being math people on a level that surprises even me.
One thing is clear though, everything has changed.
Have you done searches on negative Pell's Equation?
Isn't it weird?
How was this result so completely missed?
I feel lucky, but then again, isn't it weird? What gives?
James Harris
.
- References:
- JSH: Finally! They're caught.
- From: JSH
- Re: JSH: Finally! They're caught.
- From: Enrico
- Re: JSH: Finally! They're caught.
- From: JSH
- Re: JSH: Finally! They're caught.
- From: Enrico
- JSH: Finally! They're caught.
- Prev by Date: Re: JSH: Understanding the situation
- Next by Date: Re: JSH: Why they lurk
- Previous by thread: Re: JSH: Finally! They're caught.
- Next by thread: Re: JSH: Finally! They're caught.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
