# sci.math

**Really big formulas (formatting)**,*Victor Porton***Details of proof that No Perfect Cuboid is constructible; Pell Equation & Continued Fractions methods #1495 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***wake up & smell the**,*Space998*

**Compact opertor who's image of the unit sphere is non-compact?**,*dan . ms . chaos***SOLUTIONS MANUAL: Modern Organic Synthesis An Introduction by George Zweifel, Michael Nantz**,*cartermath15***Details of proof that No Perfect Cuboid is constructible #1494 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***details; details?**,*Space998*

**Dazzling proof that No Perfect Cuboid is constructible #1493 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***On prime numbers**,*Ross A. Finlayson***Re:***and Abrahamic religions**,*Siri Cruz***Re:***and Abrahamic religions**,*Seymour J.***Re:***and Abrahamic religions**,*Bart Goddard*

**The Serious Queen**,*Kevin Barry***Ever closer to a proof that No Perfect Cuboid exists, using trigonometry #1492 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***--- --- --- FLT example**,*Deep***Re: --- --- --- FLT example**,*quasi***Re: --- --- --- FLT example**,*Clark Smith***Re: --- --- --- FLT example**,*quasi***Re: --- --- --- FLT example**,*Space998*

**Ever closer to a proof that No Perfect Cuboid exists, using trigonometry #1491 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***----- ----- ----- on a diophantine equation**,*Deep***More blithering**,*Dale***Re: More blithering**,*Dale*

**Complete Lattice**,*William Elliot***Re: Complete Lattice**,*dullrich***Re: Complete Lattice**,*William Elliot*

**Help with Math Stack Exchange**,*William Elliot***Re: Help with Math Stack Exchange**,*Arturo Magidin***Re: Help with Math Stack Exchange**,*Ross A. Finlayson***Re: Help with Math Stack Exchange**,*Virgil***Re: Help with Math Stack Exchange**,*Ross A. Finlayson***Re: Help with Math Stack Exchange**,*Arturo Magidin***Re: Help with Math Stack Exchange**,*Ross A. Finlayson***Re: Help with Math Stack Exchange**,*Arturo Magidin*

**Likely Proof? that No Perfect Cuboid exists, using trigonometry #1488 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***finally a Proof? that No Perfect Cuboid exists because noncoprime pythagorean quadruples? #1487 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***finally a Proof that No Perfect Cuboid exists because of Beal proof #1486 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***No Gay People In Sochi!!**,*Kevin Barry***Submissive Vs Analytical: Psychiatry's Cure For Paranoid Schizophrenia**,*Kevin Barry***finally a Proof that No Perfect Cuboid exists because of Beal proof #1485 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***finally a Proof that No Perfect Cuboid exists #1484 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Near Proof of No Perfect Cuboid by Coprime requirements #1483 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Start of Proof of No Perfect Cuboid by stacking Condensed Rectangles #1482 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Start of Proof of No Perfect Cuboid by stacking Condensed Rectangles #1481 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Best way to learn number theory**,*Steffen Schuler***Re: Best way to learn number theory**,*Port563***Re: Best way to learn number theory**,*Jack Fearnley***Re: Best way to learn number theory**,*Space998***Re: Best way to learn number theory**,*Steffen Schuler*

**Re: Best way to learn number theory**,*konyberg***Re: Best way to learn number theory**,*konyberg***Re: Best way to learn number theory**,*Space998*

**Testing of Corollary versus Theorem proofs Experiment; Weak Goldbach #1480 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: science and atheism ARE faiths**,*%*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: science and atheism ARE faiths**,*Siri Cruz***Re: science and atheism ARE faiths**,*Checkmate***Re: science and atheism ARE faiths**,*Dale***Re: science and atheism ARE faiths**,*Bart Goddard*

**EINSTEIN ET LES RUINES DE L'ESPRIT**,*Pentcho Valev***Let L be a normed space , v1 , and v2 two vectors of norm 1 ....**,*dan . ms . chaos***Re: Let L be a normed space , v1 , and v2 two vectors of norm 1 ....**,*quasi***Re: Let L be a normed space , v1 , and v2 two vectors of norm 1 ....**,*dan . ms . chaos*

**----- ----- ----- conditional proof of a diophantine equation-2**,*Deep***NEWCOMERS to sci.math - PLEASE READ THIS**,*Port563***Re: NEWCOMERS to sci.math - PLEASE READ THIS**,*William Elliot*

**Proof of No Perfect Cuboid and proof of Weak Goldbach #1476 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: Proof of No Perfect Cuboid and proof of Weak Goldbach #1476 Correcting Math**,*Space998***Proof of Weak Goldbach #1477 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Proof of No Perfect Cuboid #1478 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium*

**----- ----- ----- conditional proof of a diophantine equation**,*Deep***Worstest conspiracy ever**,*truth . inc . 517***Re: Worstest conspiracy ever**,*Dirk Van de moortel***Re: Worstest conspiracy ever**,*wpihughes*

**Re: Worstest conspiracy ever**,*Jens Stuckelberger*

**Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*Virgil*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*wpihughes***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*wpihughes***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*wpihughes***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*wpihughes***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*wpihughes***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*wpihughes***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*wpihughes***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*wpihughes***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*wpihughes***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*wpihughes***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*wpihughes***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*wpihughes**Message not available***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*wpihughes***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*wpihughes***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: WM never gets it - but we get it!**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*wpihughes***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: WM never gets it - but we get it!**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*wpihughes***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: WM never got it - but we get it!**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*wpihughes***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*wpihughes***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*wpihughes***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*wpihughes***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: WM never got it - but we get it!**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: WM never gets it - but we get it!**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: WM never get it - but we get it!**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: WM never gets it - but we get it!**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: WM never gets it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: WM never gets it - but we get it!**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: WM never got it - but we get it!**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: WM never gets it - but we get it!**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: WM never gets it - but we get it!**,*Virgil*

**Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: WM never got it - but we get it!**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*WM***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: WM never got it - but we get it!**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: WM never gets it - but we get it!**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: WM never get it!**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: WM never gets it - but we do!**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: WM never gets it**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We get it !**,*Virgil***Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We get it - we get it!**,*Virgil*

**Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*Virgil*

**Re: § 424 Actual Infinity: We never get it - but we get it!**,*Space998*

**Re: How the 4 Maxwell Equations derives all the axioms of mathematics, both Algebra and Geometry; phony 4th dimension #1446 New Physics #1796 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed**,*arron . wallman***FLT is a corollary of Beal and more difficult; Proof of Weak Goldbach #1475 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Summary of the AP proofs of FLT and Beal #1473 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Summary of the AP proofs of Beal and then FLT #1474 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium*

**Topology, the worst & most wastrel subject in mathematics evidenced by Poincare conjecture and fake Perelman proof #1472 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***The shame and ridiculous 4 Color Mapping and the fake proof by Appel & Haken #1471 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***With a quick question**,*Doug Mika***Re: With a quick question**,*Ray Vickson***Re: With a quick question**,*amzoti***Re: With a quick question**,*wpihughes***Re: With a quick question**,*Hlauk***Re: With a quick question**,*wpihughes***Re: With a quick question**,*Hlauk***Re: With a quick question**,*wpihughes***Re: With a quick question**,*Hlauk***Re: With a quick question**,*Hlauk***Re: With a quick question**,*wpihughes***Re: With a quick question**,*Hlauk***Re: With a quick question**,*Hlauk***Re: With a quick question**,*wpihughes*

**DOPPLER DISPROVES EINSTEIN**,*Pentcho Valev***Re: DOPPLER DISPROVES EINSTEIN**,*christian.bau***Re: DOPPLER DISPROVES EINSTEIN**,*Pentcho Valev*

**Pierre Fermat ever stack rectangles? If so, then he likely had a proof of FLT #1469 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Identity Map.**,*William Elliot***matheology sqrt(-3.1415...) WN explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*wpihughes***Re: matheology sqrt(-3.1415...) WN explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*Virgil***Re: matheology sqrt(-3.1415...) WN explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*WM***Re: matheology sqrt(-3.1415...) WN explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*wpihughes***Re: matheology sqrt(-3.1415...) WN explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*Virgil***Re: matheology sqrt(-3.1415...) WN explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*WM***Re: matheology sqrt(-3.1415...) WN explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*Virgil***Re: matheology sqrt(-3.1415...) WN explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*wpihughes***Re: matheology sqrt(-3.1415...) WN explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*WM***Re: matheology sqrt(-3.1415...) WN explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*wpihughes***Re: matheology sqrt(-3.1415...) WN explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*WM***Re: matheology sqrt(-3.1415...) WN explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*wpihughes***Re: matheology sqrt(-3.1415...) WN explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*WM***Re: matheology sqrt(-3.1415...) WN explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*wpihughes***Re: matheology sqrt(-3.1415...) WN explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*WM***Re: matheology sqrt(-3.1415...) WN explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*wpihughes***Re: matheology sqrt(-3.1415...) WN explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*WM***Re: matheology sqrt(-3.1415...) WN explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*wpihughes***Re: matheology sqrt(-3.1415...) WN explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*Virgil***Re: matheology sqrt(-3.1415...) WN explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*Virgil***Re: matheology sqrt(-3.1415...) WN explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*Virgil***Re: WMatheology : WM explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*Virgil***Re: WMatheology : WM explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*WM***Re: WMatheology : WM explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*Virgil***Re: WMatheology : WM explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*WM***Re: WMatheology : WM explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*Virgil***Re: WMatheology : WM explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*WM***Re: WMatheology : WM explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*Virgil***Re: matheology sqrt(-3.1415...) WN explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*Virgil*

**Re: matheology sqrt(-3.1415...) WN explains what he means by a Binary Tree**,*Virgil*

**a question on the real projective plane**,*David Bernier***Re: a question on the real projective plane**,*Arturo Magidin***Re: a question on the real projective plane**,*Arturo Magidin***Re: a question on the real projective plane**,*Arturo Magidin*

**Re: a question on the real projective plane**,*Ken Pledger***Re: a question on the real projective plane**,*David Bernier***Re: a question on the real projective plane**,*Arturo Magidin***Re: a question on the real projective plane**,*David Bernier***Re: a question on the real projective plane**,*David Bernier***Re: a question on the real projective plane**,*Arturo Magidin*

*****s vs Islam**,*Kevin Barry***Penn. State Univ Dr. Ecker reconsider's AP's No Odd Perfect Proof**,*Archimedes Plutonium***§ 423 The purposes of the Binary Tree proof is to show first that there are not more than countably many infinite paths and second that there is no actually infinite path.**,*WM***Re: § 423 The purposes of the Binary Tree proof is to show first that there are not more than countably many infinite paths and second that there is no actually infinite path.**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: § 423 The purposes of the Binary Tree proof is to show first that there are not more than countably many infinite paths and second that there is no actually infinite path.**,*WM***Re: § 423 The purposes of the Binary Tree proof is to show first that there are not more than countably many infinite paths and second that there is no actually infinite path.**,*Ben Bacarisse**WM***Re: § 423 The purposes of the Binary Tree proof is to show first that there are more than countably many infinite paths and second that there is an actually infinite path.**,*Virgil**Ben Bacarisse***Re: ? 423 The purposes of the Binary Tree proof is to show first that there are more than countably many infinite paths and second that there is an actually infinite path.**,*Virgil**WM***Re: § 423 The purposes of the Binary Tree proof is to show first that there are more than countably many infinite paths and second that there is an actually infinite path.**,*Virgil**Ben Bacarisse**WM**Ben Bacarisse**WM***Re: § 423 The purposes of the Binary Tree proof is to show first that there are far more than countably manyi nfinite paths and second that there are LOTS of actually infinite path.**,*Virgil**Ben Bacarisse**WM**Ben Bacarisse***Re: ? 423 The purposes of the Binary Tree proof is to show first that there are not more than countably many infinite paths and second that there is no actually infinite path.**,*Virgil***Re: § 423 The purposes of the Binary Tree proof is to show first that there are more than countably many infinite paths and second that there are actually infinite paths.**,*Virgil***Re: § 423 The purposes of the Binary Tree proof is to show first that there are many more than countably many infinite paths and second that there are actually infinite paths.**,*Virgil***Re: § 423 The purposes of the Binary Tree proof is to show first that there are far more than countably many infinite paths and second that there are many actually infinite paths.**,*Virgil***Re: § 423 The purposes of the Binary Tree proof is to show first that there are many more than countably many infinite paths, and second that there are uncountably many actually infinite paths.**,*Virgil***Re: § 423 The purposes of the Binary Tree proof is to show first that there are more than countably many infinite paths and second that there is an actually infinite path.**,*Virgil*

*John Gibson**wpihughes**WM**wpihughes**WM**wpihughes**WM**wpihughes**WM**wpihughes**WM**wpihughes**WM**wpihughes***Re: § 423 The purposes of the Binary Tree proof is to show first that there are t more than countably many infinite paths and second that paths are actually infinite.**,*Virgil***Re: § 423 The purposes of the Binary Tree proof is to show first that there are far more than countably many paths and second that there are actually infinite paths.**,*Virgil**Virgil**Virgil**Virgil***Re: § 423 The purposes of the Binary Tree proof is to show first that there are more than countably many infinite paths and second that there are actually infinite paths.**,*Virgil*

*WM**wpihughes**WM**wpihughes**WM**wpihughes**WM**wpihughes**WM**wpihughes**WM**wpihughes**WM**Ben Bacarisse**WM***Re: § 423 The purposes of the Binary Tree proof is to show first that there aremany more than countably many infinite paths and second that there are actually infinite paths.**,*Virgil***Re: § 423 The purposes of the Binary Tree proof is to show first that there aremany more than countably many infinite paths and second that there are actually infinite paths.**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: ? 423 The purposes of the Binary Tree proof is to show first that there are many more than countably many infinite paths and second that there are actually infinite paths.**,*Virgil**Ben Bacarisse**WM***Re: § 423 The purposes of the Binary Tree proof is to show first that there are many more than countably many infinite paths and that paths are actually infinite**,*Virgil***Re: § 423 The purposes of the Binary Tree proof is to show first that there are far more than countably manyinfinite paths and second that there are actually infinite paths.**,*Virgil**Virgil***Re: § 423 The purposes of the Binary Tree proof is to show first that there are more than countably many infinite paths and second that there are actually infinite paths.**,*Virgil**Virgil**Virgil***Re: § 423 The purposes of the Binary Tree proof is to show first that there are not more than countably manyinfinite paths and second that there is no actually infinite path.**,*Virgil*

**Re: § 423 The purposes of the Complete Infinite Binary Tree proof is to show first that there are more than countably many infinite paths and second that there are actually infinite paths.**,*Virgil*

**solutions manual books**,*allsolutionsbooks***SOLUTIONS MANUAL**,*allsolutionsbooks*- <Possible follow-ups>
**solutions manual**,*allsolutionsbooks***solutions manual**,*trustsolutionsteam*

**Mukhtarbay Otelbaev and Navier-Sokes**,*David Bernier***math.stackexchange**,*William Elliot***Re: math.stackexchange**,*amzoti***Re: math.stackexchange**,*Rick Decker***Re: math.stackexchange**,*William Elliot***Re: math.stackexchange**,*amzoti***Re: math.stackexchange**,*David Bernier***Re: math.stackexchange**,*Ross A. Finlayson***Re: math.stackexchange**,*Ross A. Finlayson***Re: math.stackexchange**,*David Bernier***Re: math.stackexchange**,*Timothy Murphy***Re: math.stackexchange**,*William Elliot*

**What is this structure called?**,*Sandy***Re: What is this structure called?**,*Christopher J. Henrich***Re: What is this structure called?**,*Sandy***Re: What is this structure called?**,*William Elliot***Re: What is this structure called?**,*Peter Percival***Re: What is this structure called?**,*G. A. Edgar***Re: What is this structure called?**,*Sandy*

**2D->3D vs 3D->4D**,*Phil***Re: 2D->3D vs 3D->4D**,*Roland Franzius***Re: 2D->3D vs 3D->4D**,*Seymour J.***Re: 2D->3D vs 3D->4D**,*Roland Franzius***Re: 2D->3D vs 3D->4D**,*Seymour J.***Re: 2D->3D vs 3D->4D**,*Roland Franzius***Re: 2D->3D vs 3D->4D**,*Seymour J.***Re: 2D->3D vs 3D->4D**,*Roland Franzius***Re: 2D->3D vs 3D->4D**,*Seymour J.*

**Re: 2D->3D vs 3D->4D**,*David Bernier***Re: 2D->3D vs 3D->4D**,*Port563***Re: 2D->3D vs 3D->4D**,*Phil***Re: 2D->3D vs 3D->4D**,*Space998*

**Fwd: Roots of Unity | ASTOUNDING: 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + ... = -1/12**,*Sam Wormley***10 will get you 20?**,*JohnF***Re: 10 will get you 20?**,*JohnF***Re: 10 will get you 20?**,*Port563***Re: 10 will get you 20?**,*Bart Goddard***Re: 10 will get you 20?**,*JohnF***Re: 10 will get you 20?**,*Bart Goddard**Message not available***Re: 10 will get you 20?**,*JohnF***Re: 10 will get you 20?**,*David Bernier*

**Any Cambridge math professor with dignity and integrity to publish No Odd Perfect proof and Finitude of Perfect Numbers**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: Any Cambridge math professor with dignity and integrity to publish No Odd Perfect proof and Finitude of Perfect Numbers**,*Port563***so many, so called mathematicians have too much subjectivity to not be mathematicians**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: so many, so called mathematicians have too much subjectivity to not be mathematicians**,*Port563***When is a proof in mathematics actually a PROOF? #1466 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: When is a proof in mathematics actually a PROOF? #1466 Correcting Math**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: When is a proof in mathematics actually a PROOF? #1466 Correcting Math**,*Port563***Re: When is a proof in mathematics actually a PROOF? #1466 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: When is a proof in mathematics actually a PROOF? #1466 Correcting Math**,*Port563***Re: so many, so called mathematicians have too much subjectivity to not be mathematicians**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: so many, so called mathematicians have too much subjectivity to not be mathematicians**,*Port563***Re: so many, so called mathematicians have too much subjectivity to not be mathematicians**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: so many, so called mathematicians have too much subjectivity to not be mathematicians**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: so many, so called mathematicians have too much subjectivity to not be mathematicians**,*Port563***Re: so many, so called mathematicians have too much subjectivity to not be mathematicians**,*Marshall***Re: so many, so called mathematicians have too much subjectivity to not be mathematicians**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: so many, so called mathematicians have too much subjectivity to not be mathematicians**,*Port563***Re: so many, so called mathematicians have too much subjectivity to not be mathematicians**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: so many, so called mathematicians have too much subjectivity to not be mathematicians**,*Port563*

**Re: Any Cambridge math professor with dignity and integrity to publish No Odd Perfect proof and Finitude of Perfect Numbers**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*

**Commonsense approach to Implication in Logic as T,F, undefined, undefined #1465 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: CAAA2012 full papers**,*Ross A. Finlayson***Re: CAAA2012 full papers**,*Julian Grodzicky*

**Under The Dome**,*Kevin Barry***Limit Problem**,*K_h***Re: Limit Problem**,*Roland Franzius***Re: Limit Problem**,*Ray Vickson***Re: Limit Problem**,*Roland Franzius***Re: Limit Problem**,*K_h***Re: Limit Problem**,*Roland Franzius*

**Re: Limit Problem**,*Leon Aigret***Re: Limit Problem**,*K_h*

**All proofs in mathematics are construction proofs #1464 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Hardy & Wright's Conjecture re Fermat primes, and an extension**,*Port563***NEED HELP with basic graphing...**,*avenclaire***Re: NEED HELP with basic graphing...**,*avenclaire***Re: NEED HELP with basic graphing...**,*William Elliot*

**Detailed Proofs of Fermat's Last Theorem and then Beal's conjecture #1463 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***The common addictive bad habit of reductio ad absurdum #1462 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Bring's 24 page Lund thesis (1786) on transforming 5-ics nto x^5+ax+b.**,*mckayjoh29***Re: mathematization of quantifiers, Euler's formula, and two paradoxes**,*Space998***Scale Free Evolution Strategy Optimization Algorithm**,*bitterlemon40***Scale Free Evolution Strategy Optimization Algorithm**,*bitterlemon40*

**learn tensors?**,*RichD***Re: learn tensors?**,*Jens Stuckelberger***Re: learn tensors?**,*RichD***Re: learn tensors?**,*Jens Stuckelberger*

**Re: learn tensors?**,*J.B. Wood***Re: learn tensors?**,*Christopher J. Henrich***Re: learn tensors?**,*J.B. Wood*

**Re: learn tensors?**,*Don Kuenz***Re: learn tensors?**,*J.B. Wood*

**Re: learn tensors?**,*Christopher J. Henrich*

**undefined in material conditional we lose the contrapositive, reductio ad absurdum, etc #1460 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***My new video on algebra and mathematics**,*eugene381***Re: My new video on algebra and mathematics**,*Jens Stuckelberger*

**----- ----- ----- a new challenge in number theory**,*Deep***Unsolved Problems $1000 prizes**,*timro21***Re: Unsolved Problems $1000 prizes**,*Port563***Re: Unsolved Problems $1000 prizes**,*Port563***Re: Unsolved Problems $1000 prizes**,*quasi***Re: Unsolved Problems $1000 prizes**,*Port563***Re: Unsolved Problems $1000 prizes**,*Port563***Re: Unsolved Problems $1000 prizes**,*quasi***Re: Unsolved Problems $1000 prizes**,*Port563***Re: Unsolved Problems $1000 prizes**,*Port563***Re: Unsolved Problems $1000 prizes**,*quasi***Re: Unsolved Problems $1000 prizes**,*Port563*

**Re: Unsolved Problems $1000 prizes**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Unsolved Problems $1000 prizes**,*timro21***Re: Unsolved Problems $1000 prizes**,*Port563*

**Re: Unsolved Problems $1000 prizes**,*timro21***Re: Unsolved Problems $1000 prizes**,*Port563*

**Sartre vs VooDoo**,*Kevin Barry***Proof of No Odd Perfect predictions about Odd Abundant & Deficient Numbers #1459 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Corruption in math; Proof of Goldbach and Generalized Goldbach #1458 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***International Business Directory with Live Chat**,*info . angelance*- <Possible follow-ups>
**International Business Directory with Live Chat**,*info . angelance*

**Summing Integers to infinity**,*J.B. Wood***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*FredJeffries***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*Richard Tobin***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*WM***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*fom***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*WM***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*Port563***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*fom***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*WM***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*Port563***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*Roland Franzius***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*Port563***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*Sam Sung***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*WM***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*Port563***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*WM***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*Port563***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*Virgil***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*Virgil***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*Port563***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*Virgil***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*Sam Sung***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*Port563***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*Sam Sung***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*WM***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*Virgil***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*Virgil*

**Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*Virgil***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*dullrich*

**Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*Arturo Magidin***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*J.B. Wood***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*FredJeffries***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*Sam Sung*

**Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*Virgil***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*dullrich*

**Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*christian.bau***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*Ross A. Finlayson*

**Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*Sam Sung***Re: Summing Integers to infinity**,*Sam Sung*

**advice on nonlinear optimization**,*oercim***Re: advice on nonlinear optimization**,*Port563***Re: advice on nonlinear optimization**,*oercim***Re: advice on nonlinear optimization**,*Port563***Re: advice on nonlinear optimization**,*oercim*

**Re: advice on nonlinear optimization**,*Ray Vickson***Re: advice on nonlinear optimization**,*bitterlemon40*

**§ 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*mueckenh***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*mueckenh***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*mueckenh***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*mueckenh***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*Virgil***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*Virgil***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*Virgil*

**Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*wpihughes***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*Port563***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*mueckenh***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*wpihughes***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*WM***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*karl***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*WM***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*karl***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*Virgil***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*wpihughes***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*WM***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*wpihughes***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*WM***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*wpihughes***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*WM***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*wpihughes***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*WM***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*Virgil***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*Virgil***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*Virgil***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*Sam Sung***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*Virgil***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*Virgil***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*Virgil***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*Virgil*

**Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*Pfsszxt***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*Virgil***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*WM***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*Michael F. Stemper***Re: § 422 What is a definitionof a number?**,*Virgil***Re: § 422 What is a definitionof a number?**,*WM***Re: § 422 What is a definitionof a number?**,*Virgil***Re: § 422 What is a definitionof a number?**,*Michael F. Stemper*

**Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*Virgil***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*Virgil***Re: § 422 What is a definition of a number?**,*Virgil*

**Valid No Odd Perfect proof predictions about Odd Abundant & Deficient Numbers #1457 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: NO Valid No Odd Perfect proof**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*

**"Good" primes - conjectures and results**,*Port563***Re: "Good" primes - conjectures and results**,*Steffen Schuler***Re: "Good" primes - conjectures and results (corrected typo)**,*Steffen Schuler***Re: "Good" primes - conjectures and results**,*Port563***Re: "Good" primes - conjectures and results**,*Steffen Schuler*

**Re: "Good" primes - conjectures and results**,*Steffen Schuler*

**Valid No OddPerfect proof predicts 9 is the maximum Odd Deficient Number #1456 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: Valid No OddPerfect proof predicts 9 is the maximum Odd Deficient Number #1456 Correcting Math**,*Space998***Re: Valid No OddPerfect proof predicts 9 is the maximum Odd Deficient Number #1456 Correcting Math**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***prrof**,*Space998*

**bi-unique odd deficient numbers 3 and 9 #1461 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: Valid No OddPerfect proof predicts 9 is the maximum Odd Deficient Number #1456 Correcting Math**,*konyberg*

**haha can't do it, either**,*Space998***----- ----- ----- quest for integer solutions**,*Deep***probably doesn't work**,*humbled survivor***Valid No Odd Perfect proof predicts odd abundant numbers #1455 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Cantor debunkers, take heart**,*FredJeffries***Detailed Proofs of both Beal and FLT #1454 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: Why does WM ask stupid rhetorical questions [...]**,*Port563***Really simple problem re primes**,*Port563***Re: Really simple problem re primes**,*Port563***Re: Really simple problem re primes**,*William Elliot***Re: Really simple problem re primes**,*Port563***Re: Really simple problem re primes**,*William Elliot*

**Re: Really simple problem re primes**,*fom***Re: Really simple problem re primes**,*Port563***Re: Really simple problem re primes**,*fom***Re: Really simple problem re primes**,*Port563***Re: Really simple problem re primes**,*Ross A. Finlayson***Re-introduction of Myself to sci.math ? [reply to Ross Finlayson]**,*Port563*

**No Odd Perfect Number beyond 1, PROOF #1453 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***a quick question**,*dougmmika***Re: a quick question**,*Arturo Magidin***Re: a quick question**,*Doug Mika*

**some history of my No Odd Perfect proof #1452 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***near final proof No Odd Perfect Number beyond 1 #1451 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***----- ----- ----- integer solutions**,*Deep***Re: ----- ----- ----- integer solutions**,*John Gibson***Re: ----- ----- ----- integer solutions**,*quasi*

**Re: DARWIN'S THEORY KNOCKED FOR A LOOP**,*Jens Stuckelberger***Homotopically Equivalent**,*William Elliot***Final Detailed Constructive proof of No Odd Perfect Number beyond 1 #1449 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***I need a patch on . . Constructive proof of No Odd Perfect Number #1450 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium*

**Detailed Constructive proof of No Odd Perfect Number beyond 1 #1447 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Detailed Constructive proof of No Odd Perfect Number beyond 1 #1446 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***binary relation on a set**,*novis***Re: binary relation on a set**,*William Elliot*

**----- ----- ----- integer solutions**,*Deep***Surface geodesics**,*€XPOSITO***Re: Surface geodesics**,*€XPOSITO***Re: Surface geodesics**,*Space998***Re: Surface geodesics**,*€XPOSITO***Surface geodesics**,*William Elliot***Re: Surface geodesics**,*Ross A. Finlayson***Re: Surface geodesics**,*€XPOSITO***Re: Surface geodesics**,*Seymour J.*

**Re: Surface geodesics**,*Leon Aigret***Re: Surface geodesics**,*€XPOSITO*

**Re: Surface geodesics**,*William Elliot***Re: Surface geodesics**,*€XPOSITO***Re: Surface geodesics**,*William Elliot***Re: Surface geodesics**,*€XPOSITO***Re: Surface geodesics**,*William Elliot***Re: Surface geodesics**,*€XPOSITO*

**Ferent Transdisciplinarity Equations**,*adrferent***Re: Ferent Transdisciplinarity Equations**,*adrferent*

**Re: GENERAL RELATIVITY IS OBVIOUSLY FALSE**,*Pentcho Valev***Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*mueckenh***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*Port563***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*mueckenh***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*mueckenh***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*mueckenh***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*mueckenh***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*mueckenh***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*mueckenh***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*mueckenh***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes**Message not available***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*mueckenh***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*mueckenh***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*fom***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*mueckenh***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*mueckenh***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Sam Sung***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Ralf Bader***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*WM***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*Port563***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*mueckenh***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*mueckenh***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*wpihughes***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why Mathematics accepts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why WMytheology contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why Mathematics depends on set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*mueckenh***Re: Why Wolkenmuekenheim contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why Wolkenmuekenheim fails to understand set theory**,*Michael F. Stemper***Re: Why Wolkenmuekenheim fails to understand set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*mueckenh***Re: Why Mathematics contains set theory**,*Virgil***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*dullrich***Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*Virgil*

**Re: Why Mathematics contradicts set theory**,*Virgil*

**Alternative Proof Re: Proof of No Odd Perfect Number beyond 1 exists #1445 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?**,*Port563***Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?**,*Port563***Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?**,*Port563***Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?**,*Port563***Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?**,*Port563***Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?**,*christian.bau***Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?**,*Port563***Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?**,*christian.bau***Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?**,*christian.bau***Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?**,*Phil Carmody***Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?**,*Port563***Geometry of prime pairs? (Was: Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?)**,*fom***Re: Geometry of prime pairs? (Was: Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?)**,*Space998***Re: Geometry of prime pairs? (Was: Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?)**,*quasi***Re: Geometry of prime pairs? (Was: Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?)**,*Space998***Re: Geometry of prime pairs? (Was: Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?)**,*quasi***Re: Geometry of prime pairs? (Was: Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?)**,*fom***Re: Geometry of prime pairs? (Was: Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?)**,*Port563***Re: Geometry of prime pairs? (Was: Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?)**,*fom***Re: Geometry of prime pairs? (Was: Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?)**,*fom***Re: Geometry of prime pairs? (Was: Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?)**,*fom*

**Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?**,*quasi***Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?**,*fom***Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?**,*quasi***Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?**,*Port563***Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?**,*Space998***Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?**,*Port563***Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?**,*Space998*

**Re: Physics Journal gets maths wrong? No surprise?**,*Port563*

**Re: The anguish of being Srinivasa Ramanujan**,*Peter Percival***Re: Theory of chess: Why black wins**,*Port563***why RSA has already been factored or why 2 is one of the factors of the RSA numbers**,*me***rewriting my earlier proof of FLT: please critique**,*sharma . kunapalli***Re: rewriting my earlier proof of FLT: please critique**,*Space998***Re: rewriting my earlier proof of FLT: please critique**,*quasi***Re: rewriting my earlier proof of FLT: please critique**,*sharma . kunapalli***Re: rewriting my earlier proof of FLT: please critique**,*quasi***Re: rewriting my earlier proof of FLT: please critique**,*sharma***Re: rewriting my earlier proof of FLT: please critique [DEMOLITION]**,*Port563***Re: rewriting my earlier proof of FLT: please critique [DEMOLITION]**,*Port563***Re: rewriting my earlier proof of FLT: please critique [DEMOLITION]**,*Port563*

**Re: rewriting my earlier proof of FLT: please critique**,*Port563*

**Symmetry and why Negation has two rows and Implication has undefined Truth Table #1442 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***No Odd Perfect Number beyond 1 exists PROOF #1441 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Proof of No Odd Perfect Number beyond 1 exists #1441 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Linear regression: Online description of joint distribution of intercept & slope**,*paul . domaskis***Shameless Thuggery**,*Kevin Barry***JSH exposed!**,*JSH***Re: JSH exposed!**,*James S . Harris***Re: JSH exposed!**,*Virgil***Re: JSH exposed!**,*Virgil***Re: JSH exposed!**,*Richard Tobin***Re: JSH exposed!**,*Christopher J. Henrich*

**Re: An old mathematical puzzle soon to be unraveled?**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: An old mathematical puzzle soon to be unraveled?**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*

**Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Ross A. Finlayson***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Ross A. Finlayson***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*fom***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*WM***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Richard Tobin***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument not fail? Two proofs, no disproofs!**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument not fail? Two proofs, no disproofs!**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument not fail? Two proofs, no disproofs!**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Why care if the antidiagonal argument doesn't apply to sweep? Was: Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Ross A. Finlayson***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes**Message not available***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*WM***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*WM***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*WM***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*WM***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*WM***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*WM***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*WM***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*WM***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*WM***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*WM***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*WM***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument wail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*WM***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*WM***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*WM***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*WM***Re: Why doesn't Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument rule?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument RULE?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument rule?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*WM***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*WM***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument work ?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil**Message not available***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument sail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Why does WM ask stupid rhetorical questions about Cantor's diagonal argument?**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Why does WM ask stupid rhetorical questions about Cantor's diagonal argument?**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Why does WM ask stupid rhetorical questions about Cantor's diagonal argument?**,*fom***Re: Why does WM ask stupid rhetorical questions about Cantor's diagonal argument?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does WM ask stupid rhetorical questions about Cantor's diagonal argument?**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Why does WM ask stupid rhetorical questions about Cantor's diagonal argument?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does WM ask stupid rhetorical questions about Cantor's diagonal argument?**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Why does WM ask stupid rhetorical questions about Cantor's diagonal argument?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does WM ask stupid rhetorical questions about Cantor's diagonal argument?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does WM ask stupid rhetorical questions about Cantor's diagonal argument?**,*Michael F. Stemper***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Ross A. Finlayson***Why do you enjoy beating your spouse? (was: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?)**,*Port563***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*WM***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*wpihughes***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Wisely Non-Theist***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument succeed? Twice proved, never disproved**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Port563***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*christian.bau***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Roland Franzius***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Virgil*

**Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*John Gibson***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*mueckenh***Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Ross A. Finlayson*

**Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?**,*Dick*

**Homotopic & Homeomorphic**,*William Elliot***Re: Homotopic & Homeomorphic**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Homotopic & Homeomorphic**,*William Elliot*

**Re: Homotopic & Homeomorphic**,*quasi***Re: Homotopic & Homeomorphic**,*mbeck*

**Re: Quantum computers cannot compute trancendentals?**,*David Bernier***Order Embeddings**,*William Elliot***Logical connectives-- conjunction, disjunction, implication Truth Tables must come from math metalanguage #1440 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Most proofs are easily converted from reductio ad absurdum to constructive; No Odd Perfect Number larger than 1 #1439 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: AP only proves that EVEN prefect numbers cannot be odd. No proof that no odd number is perfect.**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Proof of No Odd Perfect Number beyond 1 exists #1441 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: Proof of No Odd Perfect Number beyond 1 exists #1441 Correcting Math**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Alternative Proof Re: Proof of No Odd Perfect Number beyond 1 exists #1444 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: Alternative Proof Re: Proof of No Odd Perfect Number beyond 1 exists #1444 Correcting Math**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Alternative Proof Re: Proof of No Odd Perfect Number beyond 1 exists #1444 Correcting Math**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*

**Re: AP only proves that EVEN prefect numbers cannot be odd. No proof that no odd number is perfect.**,*Port563*

**Human Resource Management, 14th Ed Mathis Solution manual and test bank is now available for sale. Buy now at affordable prices. Contact to buy this : testbanksbiz[at[gmail.com.**,*allsolutionmanuals11***Re: Observation on Pythagorean triples**,*quasi***Re: Observation on Pythagorean triples**,*sharma . kunapalli***Re: Observation on Pythagorean triples**,*quasi*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: Observation on Pythagorean triples**,*Helmut Richter***Re: Observation on Pythagorean triples**,*sharma . kunapalli***Re: Observation on Pythagorean triples**,*Helmut Richter*

**the Material Conditional should be a primitive logical connector #1438 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Primes Are Absolute Oneness Of Relative Pairness.By Aiya-Oba**,*Aiya-Oba***Re: Any proof of Gods. NO!**,*fom***----- ----- ----- property of three coprime numbers**,*Deep***Correcting the "Material Conditional" from its erroneous past #1437 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***What is a number again?**,*Dan Christensen***Re: What is a number again?**,*dullrich***Re: What is a number again?**,*Space998***Re: What is a number again?**,*Dan Christensen*

**Re: What is a number again?**,*Dan Christensen***Re: What is a number again?**,*Dan Christensen***Re: What is a number again?**,*Space998***Re: What is a number again?**,*Dan Christensen*

**Re: What is a number again?**,*Dan Christensen***Re: What is a number again?**,*Dan Christensen*

**EXTRATERRESTRIALS WOULDN'T WANT EARTHERS FOR LUNCH**,*ED CONRAD***Re: EXTRATERRESTRIALS WOULDN'T WANT EARTHERS FOR LUNCH**,*Jens Stuckelberger*

**LES DERNIERS EINSTEINIENS EN FRANCE**,*Pentcho Valev***Re: LES DERNIERS EINSTEINIENS EN FRANCE**,*Pentcho Valev*

**Pay Per Click Management services in Hyderabad**,*rahul . webcolortech***Re: Pay Per Click Management services in Hyderabad**,*seo . naveenkumar*

**Is this correct?**,*sharma . kunapalli***Of course not, was Re: Is this correct?**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Is this correct?**,*quasi**Message not available***Re: Is this correct?**,*quasi***Re: Is this correct?**,*sharma . kunapalli***Re: Is this correct?**,*richard miller***Re: Is this correct?**,*sharma . kunapalli***Re: Is this correct?**,*quasi***Re: Is this correct?**,*sharma . kunapalli***Re: Is this correct?**,*sharma . kunapalli***Re: Is this correct?**,*Sharma***Re: Is this correct?**,*sharma . kunapalli***Re: Is this correct?**,*sharma . kunapalli***Re: Is this correct?**,*Port563***Re: Is this correct?**,*Robin Chapman*

**my largest contribution to Logic-- getting rid of Reductio Ad Absurdum by showing what it truly is #1434 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Approximation to square roots**,*luirotorres***Re: Approximation to square roots**,*William Elliot***Re: Approximation to square roots**,*luirotorres***Re: Approximation to square roots**,*luirotorres***Approximation to square roots**,*William Elliot*

**Re: Approximation to square roots**,*luirotorres***Re: Approximation to square roots**,*luirotorres*

**experimental animated von Koch field line plot...**,*Chris M. Thomasson***A canonical form for small ordinals**,*Paul***Re: A canonical form for small ordinals**,*Ross A. Finlayson***Re: A canonical form for small ordinals**,*William Elliot***Re: A canonical form for small ordinals**,*quasi***Re: A canonical form for small ordinals**,*quasi***Re: A canonical form for small ordinals**,*quasi***Re: A canonical form for small ordinals**,*Paul***Re: A canonical form for small ordinals**,*Ross A. Finlayson***Re: A canonical form for small ordinals**,*Ross A. Finlayson***Re: A canonical form for small ordinals**,*Paul***Re: A canonical form for small ordinals**,*Ross A. Finlayson*

**SPECIAL RELATIVITY IS OBVIOUSLY FALSE**,*Pentcho Valev***Re: SPECIAL RELATIVITY IS OBVIOUSLY FALSE**,*Pentcho Valev*

**a^n = a mod 6**,*sharma . kunapalli***Re: a^n = a mod 6**,*Space998***Re: a^n = a mod 6**,*quasi***Re: a^n = a mod 6**,*William Elliot*

**Re: a^n = a mod 6**,*Arturo Magidin***Re: a^n = a mod 6**,*Port563***Re: a^n = a mod 6**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: a^n = a mod 6**,*Port563***Re: a^n = a mod 6**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*

**the major Flaw of Wiles's fake proof of FLT Fermat's Last Theorem #1432 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Every great proof in math leaves a great new open question Prime Counting Function Conjecture #1431 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***whether two-prime-composites obey x/Ln(x) better than primes? #1433 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***whether three-prime-composites obey successive perfect squares #1436 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium*

**Proof of Goldbach and Generalized Goldbach conjectures #1430 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Proof of Bertrand's Postulate and AP-Postulate #1430 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Proof of Bertrand's Postulate and AP-Postulate #1429 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: random seed implications on genetics**,****tozon***What I learned from Beal to FLT and now from Bertrand to Goldbach #1428 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Proof of Generalized Goldbach conjecture-- beyond 1090, every even number has at least a 3 set solutions #1427 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***E-Z way to distinguish Yutsis (n-j) graphs?**,*fc3a501***Polynomial (not quite) division**,*hockleymitchell***Re: Polynomial (not quite) division**,*fom***Re: Polynomial (not quite) division**,*hockleymitchell***Re: Polynomial (not quite) division**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Polynomial (not quite) division**,*Ken Pledger***Re: Polynomial (not quite) division**,*William Elliot***Re: Polynomial (not quite) division**,*hockleymitchell***Re: Polynomial (not quite) division**,*Leon Aigret***Re: Polynomial (not quite) division**,*Martin Shobe*

**Re: Polynomial (not quite) division**,*Pubkeybreaker***Re: Polynomial (not quite) division**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Polynomial (not quite) division**,*Pubkeybreaker***Re: Polynomial (not quite) division**,*Martin Shobe*

**A Offer you the services offered by the university for direct teaching students at the University of Malaysia**,*ماركيتنج***Proof of Generalized Goldbach conjecture-- beyond 12, two set solutions #1425 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Generalized Goldbach conjecture-- beyond 12, two set solutions #1424 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Generalized Goldbach conjecture-- beyond 12, two set solutions #1423 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Friendly Introduction To Analysis (2ndEd) - Kosmala - Solutions Manual is now available for sale. Buy now at affordable prices. Contact to buy this : testbanksbiz[at[gmail.com.**,*allsolutionmanuals11***Combining Goldbach Triangle with Perfect Squares for a proof #1422 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Is there a Revised Goldbach Conjecture? #1420 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Goldbach Triangle whereas the proof is in Perfect Squares #1421 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium*

**counting and the brain**,*Ed Prochak***Auditing cases an interactive learning approach 5e beasley buckless glover prawitt solutions manual**,*ckorgange***Aerodynamics for engineers, 6/e bertin & cummings solutions manual**,*ckorgange***Advanced Financial Accounting 10th edition solutions manual and test bank by Theodore Christensen, David Cottrell and Richard Baker**,*ckorgange***Advanced accounting: international edition, 11/e solutions manual and test bank floyd a. Beams,**,*ckorgange***Accounting: What the Numbers Mean 10th edition solutions manual and test bank by David Marshall ,Wayne McManus , Daniel Viele**,*ckorgange***The proof of the halting theorem is not a proof**,*denzuyar***Re: The proof of the halting theorem is not a proof**,*Ed Prochak***Re: The proof of the halting theorem is not a proof**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: The proof of the halting theorem is not a proof**,****tozon***Re: The proof of the halting theorem is not a proof**,*denzuyar***Re: The proof of the halting theorem is not a proof**,*christian.bau***Re: The proof of the halting theorem is not a proof**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*

**Re: The proof of the halting theorem is not a proof**,*denzuyar***Re: The proof of the halting theorem is not a proof**,*christian.bau*

**correction of a mistake**,*denzuyar***Re: correction of a mistake**,*denzuyar***Re: correction of a mistake**,*Ed Prochak*

**"Reverse" of boolean operations**,*Steeve Beroard***algebra question, unit distance graphs**,*David Bernier***Re: algebra question, unit distance graphs**,*David Bernier*

**Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Hlauk***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Hlauk***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Hlauk***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Port563***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Port563***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Hlauk***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Hlauk***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*David Bernier***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Hlauk***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Port563***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*David Bernier***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Hlauk***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Hlauk***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Port563***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Hlauk***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Port563***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Hlauk***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Hlauk***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Port563***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*David Bernier***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Hlauk***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Port563***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Hlauk***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Port563***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Port563***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Hlauk***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Hlauk***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Hlauk***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Port563***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Hlauk***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*David Bernier***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Hlauk***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Port563***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*David Bernier***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Port563***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Port563***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Hlauk***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Port563***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Hlauk***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Port563***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Hlauk***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*David Bernier***Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*Hlauk*

**Re: Help with a factorisation, Please [Important]**,*nolabellesbakery*

**Prime Counting function x/Ln(x) for easiest proof of Bertrand's Postulate #1419 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Mathematica is four subjects (one of which is not arithemetic**,*Space998***Re: Mathematica is four subjects (one of which is not arithemetic**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: Mathematica is four subjects (one of which is not arithemetic**,*Space998***Re: Mathematica is four subjects (one of which is not arithemetic**,*christian.bau***Re: Mathematica is four subjects (one of which is not arithemetic**,*Space998***Re: Mathematica is four subjects (one of which is not arithemetic**,*Ross A. Finlayson*

**The incalculable reduncancy of baseless theorems**,*James S Harris***Simple question about irrationals, with a short note in the margin. :-)**,*Port563***Re: Simple question about irrationals, with a short note in the margin. :-)**,*William Elliot***Re: Simple question about irrationals, with a short note in the margin. :-)**,*Port563***Re: Simple question about irrationals, with a short note in the margin. :-)**,*William Elliot***Re: Simple question about irrationals, with a short note in the margin. :-)**,*Port563***Re: Simple question about irrationals, with a short note in the margin. :-)**,*William Elliot***Re: Simple question about irrationals, with a short note in the margin. :-)**,*Port563***Re: Simple question about irrationals, with a short note in the margin. :-)**,*William Elliot***Re: Simple question about irrationals, with a short note in the margin. :-)**,*Port563***Re: Simple question about irrationals, with a short note in the margin. :-)**,*Port563***Re: Simple question about irrationals, with a short note in the margin. :-)**,*Port563***Re: Simple question about irrationals, with a short note in the margin. :-)**,*William Elliot***Re: Simple question about irrationals, with a short note in the margin. :-)**,*Port563***Re: Simple question about irrationals, with a short note in the margin. :-)**,*Albrecht***Re: Simple question about irrationals, with a short note in the margin. :-)**,*Port563***Four conjectures re transcendentals**,*Port563***Re: Four conjectures re transcendentals**,*Port563***Re: Four conjectures re transcendentals**,*quasi***Re: Four conjectures re transcendentals**,*Port563***Re: Four conjectures re transcendentals**,*quasi***Re: Four conjectures re transcendentals**,*Port563***Re: Four conjectures re transcendentals**,*quasi***Re: Four conjectures re transcendentals**,*quasi***Re: Four conjectures re transcendentals**,*Port563**Message not available***Re: Four conjectures re transcendentals**,*quasi***Re: Four conjectures re transcendentals**,*quasi***Re: Four conjectures re transcendentals**,*Port563***Re: Four conjectures re transcendentals**,*quasi***Re: Four conjectures re transcendentals**,*quasi*

**Introduction to Management Accounting, 16/E Horngren, Sundem Test bank and solution manual is now available for sale. Buy now at affordable prices. Contact to buy this : testbanksbiz[at[gmail.com.**,*allsolutionmanuals11***Easy mapping**,*Sam Sung***Re: Easy mapping**,*quasi***Re: Easy mapping**,*Sam Sung***Re: Easy mapping**,*Sam Sung***Re: Easy mapping**,*quasi***Re: Easy mapping**,*Sam Sung***Re: Easy mapping**,*quasi***Re: Easy mapping**,*quasi***Re: Easy mapping**,*quasi***Re: Easy mapping**,*Sam Sung***Re: Easy mapping**,*Sam Sung***Re: Easy mapping**,*quasi***Re: Easy mapping**,*Sam Sung***Re: Easy mapping**,*quasi***Re: Easy mapping**,*Seymour J.***Re: Easy mapping**,*Port563***Re: Easy mapping**,*Sam Sung***Re: Easy mapping**,*Roland Franzius***Re: Easy mapping**,*Seymour J.*

**Re: Easy mapping**,*Sam Sung*

**Ross Finlayson helping AP to post No Odd Perfect proof to arXiv.org**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: Ross Finlayson helping AP to post No Odd Perfect proof to arXiv.org**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Ross Finlayson helping AP to post No Odd Perfect proof to arXiv.org**,*Ross A. Finlayson***let a zillion proofs of Fermat's "last theorem ... I forget**,*Space998***endorser Re: Ross Finlayson helping AP to post No Odd Perfect proof to arXiv.org**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: Ross Finlayson helping AP to post No Odd Perfect proof to arXiv.org**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: Ross Finlayson helping AP to post No Odd Perfect proof to arXiv.org**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: Ross Finlayson helping AP to post No Odd Perfect proof to arXiv.org**,*Archimedes Plutonium*

**Prime Counting function x/Ln(x) for easiest proof of Bertrand's Postulate #1418 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Infantilism vs Being Infantile**,*Kevin Barry***Re: Infantilism vs Being Infantile**,*miguelpastrana58*

**Re: VARIABLE SPEED OF LIGHT IN GRAVITY**,*Pentcho Valev***Re: VARIABLE SPEED OF LIGHT IN GRAVITY**,*Pentcho Valev***Re: VARIABLE SPEED OF LIGHT IN GRAVITY**,*Pentcho Valev*

**One paragraph proof of Bertrand's Postulate #1416 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***One sentence proof Re: One paragraph proof of Bertrand's Postulate #1417 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: One paragraph proof of Bertrand's Postulate #1416 Correcting Math**,*miguelpastrana58***Re: One paragraph proof of Bertrand's Postulate #1416 Correcting Math**,*miguelpastrana58*

**Details of World's easiest proof of Bertrand's Postulate #1415 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Detailed Proofs of both Beal and FLT #1414 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Would you recommend my student accept this wager? (Easy question)**,*Port563***Re: Would you recommend my student accept this wager? (Easy question)**,*Port563***Re: Would you recommend my student accept this wager? (Easy question)**,*wpihughes***Re: Would you recommend my student accept this wager? (Easy question)**,*quasi***Re: Would you recommend my student accept this wager? (Easy question)**,*Port563***Re: Would you recommend my student accept this wager? (Easy question)**,*quasi***Re: Would you recommend my student accept this wager? (Easy question)**,*Port563***Re: Would you recommend my student accept this wager? (Easy question)**,*quasi***Re: Would you recommend my student accept this wager? (Easy question)**,*wpihughes***Re: Would you recommend my student accept this wager? (Easy question)**,*Port563*

**Is Andrew Wiles the Bernie Madoff of mathematics with his FLT that cannot do Beal?**,*Archimedes Plutonium***PONZI LOGIC Re:Is Andrew Wiles the Bernie Madoff of mathematics with his FLT that cannot do Beal?**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: PONZI LOGIC Re:Is Andrew Wiles the Bernie Madoff of mathematics with his FLT that cannot do Beal?**,*Space998***Re: PONZI LOGIC Re:Is Andrew Wiles the Bernie Madoff of mathematics with his FLT that cannot do Beal?**,*Archimedes Plutonium***the ponzo effect**,*Space998***Re: the ponzo effect**,*Clark Smith***Re: the ponzo effect**,*Space998***characterization of Fermat primes is an open problem**,*Space998*

**2nd stab; explanation, World's easiest proof of Bertrand's Postulate #1413 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*FredJeffries***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Sam Sung***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*fom***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*FredJeffries***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*fom***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*David Bernier***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*quasi***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*fom***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*WM***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Virgil***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*fom***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*fom***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*WM***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Virgil***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*mueckenh***TegmarK is a NASA profiler of Nutty professorS**,*Space998***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Virgil***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*FredJeffries***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*WM***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Virgil***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*fom***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Space998***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*David Bernier***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*WM***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*mueckenh***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse**Message not available***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Virgil***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Virgil***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Virgil***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*fom***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Sam Sung***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Sam Sung***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Sam Sung***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*fom***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Sam Sung***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Ross A. Finlayson***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Sam Sung***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Ross A. Finlayson***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Space998***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*JohnF***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Space998***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*fom***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Space998***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*JohnF***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Sam Sung***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Sam Sung***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*fom***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Space998***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Ross A. Finlayson***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*fom***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*JohnF***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*fom***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*JohnF***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*fom**Message not available***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*fom*

**Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Peter Percival***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Sam Sung***Re: Max Tegmark wants to retire Infinity**,*Peter Percival*

**1st stab; explanation, World's easiest proof of Bertrand's Postulate #1412 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Hypnosis vs Christianity**,*Kevin Barry***The Pathology of The Jew**,*Kevin Barry***Re: Is the Universe Made of Math? [Excerpt]**,*richard miller*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: Is the Universe Made of Math? [Excerpt]**,*mueckenh***Re: Is the Universe Made of Math? [Excerpt]**,*fom***Re: Is the Universe Made of Math? [Excerpt]**,*mueckenh***Re: Is the Universe Made of Math? [Excerpt]**,*Virgil***Re: Is the Universe Made of Math? [Excerpt]**,*mueckenh***Re: Is the Universe Made of Math? [Excerpt]**,*Virgil***Re: Is the Universe Made of Math? [Excerpt]**,*mueckenh***Re: Is the Universe Made of Math? [Excerpt]**,*Virgil*

**Re: Is the Universe Made of Math? [Excerpt]**,*Virgil*

**Re: Is the Universe Made of Math? [Excerpt]**,*Space998***Re: Is the Universe Made of Math? [Excerpt]**,*Space998***Re: Is the Universe Made of Math? [Excerpt]**,*Space998*

**Typesetting theses and dissertations**,*Peter Percival***Re: Typesetting theses and dissertations**,*Ben Bacarisse*

**Q about the definition of a topological space**,*Peter Percival***Re: Q about the definition of a topological space**,*Rotwang***Re: Q about the definition of a topological space**,*Peter Percival***Re: Q about the definition of a topological space**,*Peter Percival***Re: Q about the definition of a topological space**,*fom***Re: Q about the definition of a topological space**,*FredJeffries***Re: Q about the definition of a topological space**,*fom***Re: Q about the definition of a topological space**,*Peter Percival***Re: Q about the definition of a topological space**,*fom***Re: Q about the definition of a topological space**,*Seymour J.***Re: Q about the definition of a topological space**,*fom***Re: Q about the definition of a topological space**,*FredJeffries***Re: Q about the definition of a topological space**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Q about the definition of a topological space**,*fom***Re: Q about the definition of a topological space**,*FredJeffries***Re: Q about the definition of a topological space**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Q about the definition of a topological space**,*fom***Re: Q about the definition of a topological space**,*Seymour J.***Re: Q about the definition of a topological space**,*Seymour J.*

**Re: Q about the definition of a topological space**,*fom***Re: Q about the definition of a topological space**,*Seymour J.***Re: Q about the definition of a topological space**,*Peter Percival*

**World's easiest proof of Bertrand's Postulate #1411 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Detailed Proof of Goldbach conjecture; corrections and improvements #1410 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*WM***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*wpihughes***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*WM***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*wpihughes***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*WM***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Virgil***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*wpihughes***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*WM***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*wpihughes***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*WM***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*wpihughes***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Virgil***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Virgil***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*wpihughes***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*fom***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line only in WMathology .**,*Virgil***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*christian.bau***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Roland Franzius***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*WM***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*christian.bau***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*WM***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Virgil***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Virgil*

**Re: Three points always belong to a straight line. Only in WMYTHEOLOGY**,*Virgil*

**Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Peter Percival***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*christian.bau*

**Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Virgil***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*WM***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Virgil***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*WM***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Virgil***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Peter Percival***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*WM***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*WM***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*mueckenh***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Virgil***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Ross A. Finlayson***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Virgil***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Virgil***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*christian.bau***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*wpihughes***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Roland Franzius***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*mueckenh***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*wpihughes***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*mueckenh***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*wpihughes***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Virgil***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Virgil***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Virgil***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Virgil***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*WM***Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Virgil*

**Re: Three points always belong to a straight line.**,*Space998*

**SOLUTIONS MANUAL: Computer Architecture - A Quantitative Approach, 4th Ed by Hennessy, Patterson**,*markrainsun4***search of nonlinear functions f and g such that f(x+y)=g(x)+g(y)**,*Patrick***Re: search of nonlinear functions f and g such that f(x+y)=g(x)+g(y)**,*Roland Franzius***Re: search of nonlinear functions f and g such that f(x+y)=g(x)+g(y)**,*David Bernier***Re: search of nonlinear functions f and g such that f(x+y)=g(x)+g(y)**,*dullrich***Re: search of nonlinear functions f and g such that f(x+y)=g(x)+g(y)**,*David Hartley*

**vector equation**,*humbled survivor***Re: vector equation**,*Sam Sung*

**returning fire**,*humbled survivor***Detailed Proof of Goldbach conjecture #1409 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***quadmath is here with the GCC 4.8 Fortran compiler**,*David Bernier***9th stab: proof of AP-postulate and thus proof of Goldbach #1408 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***8th stab: proof of AP-postulate and thus proof of Goldbach #1407 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Which music scale produces the best results? 12 or 15 or ...?**,*federation2005***matheology 0.111...**,*wpihughes***Re: matheology 0.111...**,*fom**Message not available***Re: matheology 0.111...**,*Virgil*

**Re: matheology 0.111...**,*Robin Chapman***Re: matheology 0.111...**,*wpihughes***Re: matheology 0.111...**,*Virgil*

**String Theory vs The Music Industry**,*Kevin Barry***7th stab: Bertrand's postulate versus AP-postulate in Goldbach proof #1406 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Sam Sung***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Ross A. Finlayson*

**three-dimensional 'surface' of multi-dimensional 'sphere'**,*Ken Quirici***Howto write sums of infinite series using math notation?**,*jonas . thornvall***Re: Howto write sums of infinite series using math notation?**,*jonas . thornvall***Re: Howto write sums of infinite series using math notation?**,*jonas . thornvall***Re: Howto write sums of infinite series using math notation?**,*jonas . thornvall***Re: Howto write sums of infinite series using math notation?**,*Ben Bacarisse*

**6th stab: two prime composites between successive perfect squares in Goldbach proof #1404 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Irreduciable Function**,*William Elliot***Re: Irreduciable Function**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Irreduciable Function**,*William Elliot***Re: Irreduciable Function**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*

**Re: Irreduciable Function**,*quasi***Re: Irreduciable Function**,*William Elliot***Re: Irreduciable Function**,*quasi***Re: Irreduciable Function**,*William Elliot***Re: Irreduciable Function**,*quasi***Re: Irreduciable Function**,*William Elliot***Re: Irreduciable Function**,*quasi*

**Re: Irreduciable Function**,*Seymour J.**Message not available***Re: Irreduciable Function**,*Seymour J.*

**Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*WM***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*WM***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*WM***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil**Message not available***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*WM***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Sam Sung**Message not available**Message not available**Message not available***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes**Message not available**Message not available**Message not available**Message not available***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil**Message not available**Message not available**Message not available**Message not available**Message not available***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*mueckenh***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*mueckenh***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*mueckenh***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*mueckenh***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*mueckenh***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*mueckenh***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*mueckenh***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*mueckenh***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*mueckenh***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*mueckenh***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*mueckenh***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Roland Franzius***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse**Message not available**Message not available***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil**Message not available***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*mueckenh***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*mueckenh***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil**Message not available**Message not available**Message not available**Message not available**Message not available**Message not available***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*mueckenh***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Sam Sung***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht**Message not available**Message not available**Message not available**Message not available***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*mueckenh***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*PotatoSauce***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*mueckenh***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*mueckenh***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*mueckenh***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*mueckenh***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*WM***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil*

**Re: ? 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil*

**5th stab: proof at last of Goldbach-- Goldbach Equivalent #1403 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Probability Question**,*Bill Q.***Re: Probability Question**,*Port563***Re: Probability Question**,*Jack Fearnley***Re: Probability Question**,*Port563***Re: Probability Question**,*Port563*

**Re: Probability Question**,*Port563***Re: Probability Question**,*Ray Vickson***Re: Probability Question**,*Ross A. Finlayson***Re: Probability Question**,*Port563***Re: Probability Question**,*Ray Vickson***Re: Probability Question**,*Port563*

**Re: Probability Question**,*Bill Q.***Re: Probability Question**,*Ray Vickson***Re: Probability Question**,*Port563***Re: Probability Question**,*Ray Vickson***Re: Probability Question**,*Port563*

**Re: Probability Question**,*Port563***Re: Probability Question**,*quasi***Re: Probability Question**,*quasi***Re: Probability Question**,*quasi***Re: Probability Question**,*quasi***Re: Probability Question**,*quasi***Re: Probability Question**,*quasi***Re: Probability Question**,*quasi***Re: Probability Question**,*Port563***Re: Probability Question**,*quasi***Re: Probability Question**,*Port563***Re: Probability Question**,*quasi***Re: Probability Question**,*Port563***Re: Probability Question**,*quasi***Re: Probability Question**,*quasi***Re: Probability Question**,*Port563***Re: Probability Question**,*quasi***Re: Probability Question**,*Port563***Re: Probability Question**,*quasi***Re: Probability Question**,*quasi***Re: Probability Question**,*Port563*

*Message not available**Message not available***Re: Probability Question**,*Port563*

**Re: Probability Question**,*Bill Q.*

**4th stab: modifying Ramanujan's Bertrand's to prove Goldbach #1402 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***3rd stab: Detailed Proof of Goldbach ; Bertrand's postulate method #1401 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***2nd stab: Detailed Proof of Goldbach conjecture in the works #1400 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***the path between the simple graph?**,*shaoyi he***Re: the path between the simple graph?**,*Robin Chapman***Re: the path between the simple graph?**,*edvogel56***Re: the path between the simple graph?**,*Ross A. Finlayson***Re: the path between the simple graph?**,*William Elliot***Re: the path between the simple graph?**,*shaoyi he*

**1st stab: Detailed Proof of Goldbach conjecture #1399 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Detailed Proof of Goldbach conjecture #1397 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: Detailed Proof of Goldbach conjecture #1398 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium*

**new algorithm for asymmetric cryptography**,*remy***2nd stab: Detailed Proofs of both Beal and FLT #1396 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***geometry challenge -- annular region**,*quasi***Re: geometry challenge -- annular region**,****tozon***Re: geometry challenge -- annular region**,*konyberg**Message not available***Re: geometry challenge -- annular region**,*James Waldby*

**Re: geometry challenge -- annular region**,*quasi***Re: geometry challenge -- annular region**,*Leon Aigret*

**----- ----- ----- A Diophantine Equation**,*Deep***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Anton S***Negro vs Black**,*Kevin Barry***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: a question 2x2 zero sum games**,*Bill Taylor***Re: a question 2x2 zero sum games**,*Peter Percival*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: a question 2x2 zero sum games**,****tozon*

**Re: Validating Natural Language Statements (and Mathematical Propositions)**,****tozon*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: Validating Natural Language Statements (and Mathematical Propositions)**,****tozon***Re: Validating Natural Language Statements (and Mathematical Propositions)**,*Dan Christensen*

**Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*WM***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Space998*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Bill Taylor***Re: Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Richard Tobin***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*WM***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*WM***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil*

**Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil*

**Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*WM***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*WM***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*WM***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*WM***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*WM***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes**Message not available**Message not available**Message not available***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil**Message not available**Message not available**Message not available***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*WM***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*WM***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*WM***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*WM***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*mueckenh***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Albrecht***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil*

**Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Zeit Geist***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Ross A. Finlayson***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*WM***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*WM***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*WM*

**Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil*

**Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*FredJeffries***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*WM***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*WM***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse**Message not available***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Sam Sung**Message not available***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*WM***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*mueckenh***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*mueckenh***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*wpihughes***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*WM***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*FredJeffries***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Sam Sung***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*FredJeffries***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*WM***Re: § 417 An implication of actual infinity**,*Virgil*

**Re: a non-rigid 10-vertex, 16-edge, 4-chromatic unit-distance graph**,****tozon***Re: FLT proof where n | x**,*quasi***Re: FLT proof where n | x**,****tozon***Re: FLT proof where n | x**,*Port563***Re: FLT proof where n | x**,*Space998*

- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: FLT proof where n | x**,*quasi***Re: FLT proof where n | x**,****tozon***Re: FLT proof where n | x**,*Bill Taylor*

**Proof that Perfect Numbers is a finite set #1394 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***NEW proposition re Primes [Preponderance of "1" endings in the prime factors of certain non-trivial types of large composites]**,*Port563***Re: NEW proposition re Primes [Preponderance of "1" endings in the prime factors of certain non-trivial types of large composites]**,*Port563***Re: NEW proposition re Primes [Preponderance of "1" endings in the prime factors of certain non-trivial types of large composites]**,*Pubkeybreaker***Re: NEW proposition re Primes [Preponderance of "1" endings in the prime factors of certain non-trivial types of large composites]**,*Port563***Re: Q for pubkeybreaker**,*Port563***Re: Q for pubkeybreaker**,*Pubkeybreaker***Re: Q for pubkeybreaker**,*Port563***Re: Q for pubkeybreaker**,*Pubkeybreaker***Re: Q for pubkeybreaker**,*Port563***Re: Q for pubkeybreaker**,*Phil Carmody*

****tozon*

**Analysis with An Introduction to Proof 5th edition Lay Instructors Solution manual is now available for sale. Buy now at affordable prices. Contact to buy this : testbanksbiz[at[gmail.com.**,*allsolutionmanuals11*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Analysis with An Introduction to Proof 5th edition Lay Instructors Solution manual is now available for sale. Buy now at affordable prices. Contact to buy this : testbanksbiz[at[gmail.com.**,*allsolutionmanuals11***Analysis with An Introduction to Proof 5th edition Lay Instructors Solution manual is now available for sale. Buy now at affordable prices. Contact to buy this : testbanksbiz[at[gmail.com.**,*allsolutionmanuals11**allsolutionmanuals11*

**Godels 1st theorem ends in paradox**,****tozon***Godels second theorem ends in paradox**,****tozon***By Royal Decree: An Exact Calendar! (+ Estimating reals by 1/N's -- Egyptian style)**,*federation2005***Re: By Royal Decree: An Exact Calendar! (+ Estimating reals by 1/N's -- Egyptian style)**,*fom***Re: By Royal Decree: An Exact Calendar! (+ Estimating reals by 1/N's -- Egyptian style)**,*fom***Re: By Royal Decree: An Exact Calendar! (+ Estimating reals by 1/N's -- Egyptian style)**,*David Bernier***Estimating reals by 1/N's -- Egyptian style (& the "Brentwood Calendar" reform)**,*federation2005*

**Mathematicians dont know what a number is-thus maths ends in meaninglessness**,****tozon***ZFC is shown to be inconsistent**,****tozon***Possible error in Grzegorczyk's seminal paper on Grzegorczyk hierarchy?**,*Paul***1st stab: Formal Proofs of both Beal and FLT #1392 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***angles, triangles, rectangles in FLT & Beal #1393 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: 1st stab: Formal Proofs of both Beal and FLT #1392 Correcting Math**,*Dan Christensen***Re: 1st stab: Formal Proofs of both Beal and FLT #1392 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium*

**Re: 1st stab: Formal Proofs of both Beal and FLT #1392 Correcting Math**,****tozon***Re: 1st stab: Formal Proofs of both Beal and FLT #1392 Correcting Math**,****tozon*

**To "Archimedes"**,*Pfsszxt***Re: To "Archimedes"**,*Space998***Re: To "Archimedes"**,*Port563***Re: To "Archimedes"**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*

**finally a proof of FLT, using the Beal proof to prove FLT #1391 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium*- <Possible follow-ups>
**finally a proof of FLT, using the Beal proof to prove FLT #1391 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium*

**Alien mathematics: is pi universal?**,*WM***Preliminary proof of Beal conjecture; using Condensed-Rectangles #1389 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***LaTeX**,*humbled survivor***----- ----- ----- comparison of two equations**,*Deep***Re: ----- ----- ----- comparison of two equations**,*James Waldby***Re: ----- ----- ----- comparison of two equations**,*William Elliot*

**taking on both FLT and Beal in one proof; using Condensed Rectangles #1388 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: 0.9999... = 1 that means mathematics ends in contradiction**,****tozon***Re: 0.9999... = 1 that means mathematics ends in contradiction**,*Pfsszxt*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: 0.9999... = 1 that means mathematics ends in contradiction**,*wpihughes***Re: 0.9999... = 1 that means mathematics ends in contradiction**,*Dr. Mike Ecker*

**Re: Proven 1+1=1 thus mathematics ends in contradiction**,****tozon***Re: Godel cant tells us what truth is so theorem is meaningless**,****tozon***Re: Godel cant tells us what truth is so theorem is meaningless**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: Godel cant tells us what truth is so theorem is meaningless**,****tozon*

**Re: a logical flaw in godels proof - thus proof meaninglessness**,****tozon*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: a logical flaw in godels proof - thus proof meaninglessness**,*wpihughes***Re: a logical flaw in godels proof - thus proof meaninglessness**,****tozon*

**Cardinality of Filters**,*William Elliot***Re: Cardinality of Filters**,*Peter Percival***Re: Cardinality of Filters**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*

**Status of FLT, No Odd Perfect, and Goldbach proofs #1387 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Formal proof along with High School proof of No Odd Perfect #1386 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: All proven maths statements cant be true-from Godels theorem**,****tozon***Re: All proven maths statements cant be true-from Godels theorem**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: All proven maths statements cant be true-from Godels theorem**,*wpihughes***Re: All proven maths statements cant be true-from Godels theorem**,*Robin Chapman***Re: All proven maths statements cant be true-from Godels theorem**,****tozon*

**All provable maths statements cant be true-Godel**,****tozon***assembled**,*humbled survivor***Quantum Mechanics Is Nature's Absolute Logic. By Aiya-Oba**,*Aiya-Oba***Formal proof along with High School proof of No Odd Perfect #1385 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***proof of FLT is reflected entirely on the various roots of 2, square, cube, 4th root etc #1383 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***The Parable of a Woman's Desire**,*Kevin Barry***----- ----- ----- New Question**,*Deep***Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Peter Percival***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Roland Franzius***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*jonas . thornvall***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Michael F. Stemper***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*jonas . thornvall***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*jonas . thornvall***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*jonas . thornvall***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Marshall***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Peter Percival***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Peter Percival***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Peter Percival***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*PotatoSauce***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*PotatoSauce***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*PotatoSauce***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Peter Percival***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Peter Percival***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Peter Percival***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Peter Percival***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*fom***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Peter Percival***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*PotatoSauce***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*PotatoSauce***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*PotatoSauce***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*PotatoSauce***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Peter Percival***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Peter Percival***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Peter Percival***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Peter Percival***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Peter Percival***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Peter Percival***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Peter Percival***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Peter Percival***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Peter Percival***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*fom***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*James Burns***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*fom***Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*fom***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Peter Percival***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Martin Shobe***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Peter Percival***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Peter Percival***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*dullrich***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*dullrich***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Peter Percival***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Peter Percival***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Peter Percival***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Peter Percival***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Peter Percival***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Peter Percival***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Peter Percival***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*David Bernier***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Peter Percival***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Ross A. Finlayson***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Peter Percival***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Port563***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*David Bernier***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*Port563***Re: Christensen: what exactly is his 0^0 problem?**,*fom***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*PotatoSauce***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*PotatoSauce***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*PotatoSauce***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*PotatoSauce***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*PotatoSauce***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Robin Chapman***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Peter Percival***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Dan Christensen*

**Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Roland Franzius*

**Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Peter Percival***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,****tozon***Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,****tozon*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: Constructing the Addition, Multiplication and Exponentiation Functions from Peano's Axioms**,*Neto Henderson Tangent*

**mathHandbook.com Rank second**,*drhuang57***MOVING OBSERVER TOPPLES EINSTEIN**,*Pentcho Valev***Re: MOVING OBSERVER TOPPLES EINSTEIN**,*Pentcho Valev***Re: MOVING OBSERVER TOPPLES EINSTEIN**,*wpihughes***Re: MOVING OBSERVER TOPPLES EINSTEIN**,*Pentcho Valev***Re: MOVING OBSERVER TOPPLES EINSTEIN**,*Pentcho Valev*

**Re: What Godel's theory really says**,*Ross A. Finlayson*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: What Godel's theory really says**,*fom***Re: What Godel's theory really says**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*

**Re: What Godel's theory really says**,*fom***Re: What Godel's theory really says**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: What Godel's theory really says**,*fom***Re: What Godel's theory really says**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*

**proof of FLT hinges entirely on the various roots of 2, square, cube, 4th root etc #1382 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium*- <Possible follow-ups>
**proof of FLT hinges entirely on the various roots of 2, square, cube, 4th root etc #1382 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium*

**A QUESTION FOR THE (UNRECOGNISED) GENIUSES AT MATHS WHO POST HERE.**,*Port563***Re: A QUESTION FOR THE (UNRECOGNISED) GENIUSES AT MATHS WHO POST HERE.**,*Virgil***Re: A QUESTION FOR THE (UNRECOGNISED) GENIUSES AT MATHS WHO POST HERE.**,*Ray Vickson***Re: A QUESTION FOR THE (UNRECOGNISED) GENIUSES AT MATHS WHO POST HERE.**,*Port563***Re: A QUESTION FOR THE (UNRECOGNISED) GENIUSES AT MATHS WHO POST HERE.**,*Ray Vickson***Re: A QUESTION FOR THE (UNRECOGNISED) GENIUSES AT MATHS WHO POST HERE.**,*Port563***Re: A QUESTION FOR THE (UNRECOGNISED) GENIUSES AT MATHS WHO POST HERE.**,*Ray Vickson***Re: A QUESTION FOR THE (UNRECOGNISED) GENIUSES AT MATHS WHO POST HERE.**,*wpihughes***Re: A QUESTION FOR THE (UNRECOGNISED) GENIUSES AT MATHS WHO POST HERE.**,*David Bernier*

**Re: A QUESTION FOR THE (UNRECOGNISED) GENIUSES AT MATHS WHO POST HERE.**,*fom***Re: A QUESTION FOR THE (UNRECOGNISED) GENIUSES AT MATHS WHO POST HERE.**,*Ross A. Finlayson*

**streamlined formal & High School student proof of No Odd Perfect Number larger than 1 #1381 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium*- <Possible follow-ups>
**streamlined formal & High School student proof of No Odd Perfect Number larger than 1 #1381 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium*

**Help with a factorisation, please [IMPORTANT]**,*Port563***Re: Help with a factorisation, please [IMPORTANT]**,*David Bernier***Re: Help with a factorisation, please [IMPORTANT]**,*Port563***Re: Help with a factorisation, please [IMPORTANT]**,*christian.bau***Re: Help with a factorisation, please [IMPORTANT]**,*Port563***Re: Help with a factorisation, please [IMPORTANT] (Attn: christian)**,*Port563***Re: Help with a factorisation, please [IMPORTANT] (Attn: christian)**,*Port563***Re: Help with a factorisation, please [IMPORTANT] (Attn: christian)**,*Port563***Re: Help with a factorisation, please [IMPORTANT] (Attn: christian)**,*Port563***Re: Help with a factorisation, please [IMPORTANT] (Attn: christian)**,*David Bernier***Re: Help with a factorisation, please [IMPORTANT]**,*Pubkeybreaker***Re: Help with a factorisation, please [IMPORTANT]**,*Pubkeybreaker***Re: Help with a factorisation, please [IMPORTANT]**,*Port563*

**Re: Help with a factorisation, please [IMPORTANT]**,*konyberg***Re: Help with a factorisation, please [IMPORTANT]**,*Port563***Re: Help with a factorisation, please [IMPORTANT]**,*Port563***Re: Help with a factorisation, please [IMPORTANT]**,*David Bernier***Re: Help with a factorisation, please [IMPORTANT]**,*David Bernier***Re: Help with a factorisation, please [IMPORTANT]**,*Port563***Re: Help with a factorisation, please [IMPORTANT]**,*David Bernier*

**Re: MAJOR MATHEMATICAL PROOF OF CORRECT PI VALUE RECORDED HERE**,*Port563*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: MAJOR MATHEMATICAL PROOF OF CORRECT PI VALUE RECORDED HERE**,****tozon*

**Re: nice newsgroup archive**,*Port563***High School student proof of No Odd Perfect Number larger than 1 #1380 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***FLT is A+B=C, and parallel proof is 1+2B=C #1379 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium*- <Possible follow-ups>
**FLT is A+B=C, and parallel proof is 1+2B=C #1379 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium*

**Simple algebraic problem - but my young student rejects my method as too complex**,*Port563***Feferman and CH**,*WM***Re: Feferman and CH**,*Virgil*

**----- ----- ----- Properties of co-prime integers**,*Deep***Re: ----- ----- ----- Properties of co-prime integers**,*James Waldby***Re: ----- ----- ----- Properties of co-prime integers**,*quasi**Message not available***Re: ----- ----- ----- Properties of co-prime integers**,*James Waldby*

**first formal proof attempt of FLT with 1+2B=C #1375 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Subsets of the naturals**,*jonas . thornvall***Re: Subsets of the naturals**,*Virgil***Re: Subsets of the naturals**,*jonas . thornvall***Re: Subsets of the naturals**,*jonas . thornvall***Re: Subsets of the naturals**,*bert***Re: Subsets of the naturals**,*jonas . thornvall***Re: Subsets of the naturals**,*jonas . thornvall***Re: Subsets of the naturals**,*jonas . thornvall***Re: Subsets of the naturals**,*jonas . thornvall***Re: Subsets of the naturals**,*Virgil*

**Re: Subsets of the naturals**,*jonas . thornvall*

**The Weak Goldbach Conjecture OR The Goldbach-Helfgott Theorem ?**,*Port563***in FLT, is 1+2B=C unique to 1,4,9 #1374 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***How would you find the parabolas determined by points {-1,2}, {1,-1}, {2,1}?**,*Hetware***in FLT, is 1+2B= C unique to 1,4,9? #1372 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: in FLT, is 1+2B= C unique to 1,4,9? #1373 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: in FLT, is 1+2B= C unique to 1,4,9? #1372 Correcting Math**,*Wizard-Of-Oz**Message not available***Re: in FLT, is 1+2B= C unique to 1,4,9? #1372 Correcting Math**,*James Waldby***every primitive P-triple has its own right-angle in form of 1+2B=C?? #1377 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: every primitive P-triple has its own right-angle in form of 1+2B=C?? #1377 Correcting Math**,*konyberg***Re: every primitive P-triple has its own right-angle in form of 1+2B=C?? #1377 Correcting Math**,*konyberg*

*Message not available*

**Matheology § 414**,*WM***Re: Matheology § 414**,*Virgil*

**Matheology § 413**,*WM***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Matheology § 413**,*WM***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil*

**Welcome to <sci.math>. These suggestions may help you.**,*Ken Pledger***Re: Welcome to <sci.math>. These suggestions may help you.**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Welcome to <sci.math>. These suggestions may help you.**,*William Elliot***Re: Welcome to <sci.math>. These suggestions may help you.**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Welcome to <sci.math>. These suggestions may help you.**,*William Elliot***Re: Welcome to <sci.math>. These suggestions may help you.**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Welcome to <sci.math>. These suggestions may help you.**,*William Elliot*

- <Possible follow-ups>
**Welcome to <sci.math>. These suggestions may help you.**,*Ken Pledger*

**A Computational Puzzle**,*rich burge***what would have been the easiest proof ever of FLT, concept of two-prior-predecessors #1371 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***The Modified FLT equation (MFLT) and conjecture**,*richard miller***Re: The Modified FLT equation (MFLT) and conjecture**,*richard miller*

**----- ----- ----- New conjecture**,*Deep***New conjecture within an old conjecture --- Collatz 3n +1\-1**,*Daniel Joyce***Re: New conjecture within an old conjecture --- Collatz 3n +1\-1**,*Daniel Joyce***Re: New conjecture within an old conjecture --- Collatz 3n +1\-1**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: New conjecture within an old conjecture --- Collatz 3n +1\-1**,*Daniel Joyce***Re: New conjecture within an old conjecture --- Collatz 3n +1\-1**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: New conjecture within an old conjecture --- Collatz 3n +1\-1**,*Daniel Joyce***Re: New conjecture within an old conjecture --- Collatz 3n +1\-1**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: New conjecture within an old conjecture --- Collatz 3n +1\-1**,*Daniel Joyce***Re: New conjecture within an old conjecture --- Collatz 3n +1\-1**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: New conjecture within an old conjecture --- Collatz 3n +1\-1**,*Daniel Joyce***Re: New conjecture within an old conjecture --- Collatz 3n +1\-1**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*

**Re: New conjecture within an old conjecture --- Collatz 3n +1\-1**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*

**Edge covering in graph**,*Steeve Beroard***Edge covering in graph**,*Steeve Beroard***Re: Edge covering in graph**,*quasi***Re: Edge covering in graph**,*quasi***Re: Edge covering in graph**,*Steeve Beroard***Re: Edge covering in graph**,*quasi***Re: Edge covering in graph**,*Steeve Beroard*

*Message not available**Message not available**Message not available***Re: Edge covering in graph**,*James Waldby***Re: Edge covering in graph**,*Steeve Beroard*

**in Goldbach proof, probably need only addition closure #1369 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: in Goldbach non proof, probably need a brain**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: in Goldbach non proof, probably need a brain**,*Ross A. Finlayson*

**still preliminary proof of Fermat's Last Theorem #1368 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***New numerical methods. The true story. Wrong assertion from math teachers and authors.**,*Domingo Gomez Morin***Re: New numerical methods. The true story. Wrong assertion from math teachers and authors.**,*Port563***Re: New numerical methods. The true story. Wrong assertion from math teachers and authors.**,*Tim Golden BandTech.com***Re: New numerical methods. The true story. Wrong assertion from math teachers and authors.**,*Domingo Gomez Morin***Re: New numerical methods. The true story. Wrong assertion from math teachers and authors.**,*rich burge***Re: New numerical methods. The true story. Wrong assertion from math teachers and authors.**,*Domingo Gomez Morin***Re: New numerical methods. The true story. Wrong assertion from math teachers and authors.**,*rich burge***Re: New numerical methods. The true story. Wrong assertion from math teachers and authors.**,*Domingo Gomez Morin***Re: New numerical methods. The true story. Wrong assertion from math teachers and authors.**,*rich burge***Re: New numerical methods. The true story. Wrong assertion from math teachers and authors.**,*Domingo Gomez Morin***Re: New numerical methods. The true story. Wrong assertion from math teachers and authors.**,*Tim Golden BandTech.com***Re: New numerical methods. The true story. Wrong assertion from math teachers and authors.**,*Domingo Gomez Morin***Re: New numerical methods. The true story. Wrong assertion from math teachers and authors.**,*Domingo Gomez Morin***Re: New numerical methods. The true story. Wrong assertion from math teachers and authors.**,*Tim Golden BandTech.com*

**Re: New numerical methods. The true story. Wrong assertion from math teachers and authors.**,*Neto Henderson Tangent***Re: New numerical methods. The true story. Wrong assertion from math teachers and authors.**,*redmond***Re: New numerical methods. The true story. Wrong assertion from math teachers and authors.**,*Domingo Gomez Morin***Re: New numerical methods. The true story. Wrong assertion from math teachers and authors.**,*Domingo Gomez Morin***Re: New numerical methods. The true story. Wrong assertion from math teachers and authors.**,*Domingo Gomez Morin*

**preliminary proof of Fermat's Last Theorem #1367 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Mach projectile problem**,*humbled survivor***Re: Mach projectile problem**,*Wally W .*

**Im-prove.**,*No News***Re: Im-prove.**,*William Elliot***Re: Im-prove.**,*JohnF***Re: Im-prove.**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*

**Re: Im-prove.**,*Virgil***Re: Im-prove.**,*William Elliot***Re: Im-prove.**,*No News***Re: Im-prove.**,*Virgil***Re: Im-prove.**,*No News*

**Re: Im-prove.**,*Peter Percival***Re: Im-prove.**,*No News*

**Re: Im-prove.**,*James Waldby***Re: Im-prove.**,*No News***Re: Im-prove.**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Im-prove.**,*David Bernier*

**Re: Im-prove.**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Im-prove.**,*No News***Re: Im-prove.**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Im-prove.**,*No News*

**Re: Im-prove.**,****tozon***Re: Im-prove.**,*Space998*

**minor revisions of Proof of the No Odd Perfect (except 1) #1366 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: minor revisions of Proof do not save it**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*

**minor revisions of Proof of the No Odd Perfect (except 1) #1365 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: minor revisions of Proof of the No Odd Perfect (except 1) #1365 Correcting Math**,*christian.bau***Proof of the No Odd Perfect for 3 or larger #1370 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium*

**Formal Proof of the Goldbach Conjecture #1364 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Proof of FLT and why 1 + 2B =C forces the proof #1363 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***THE ONLY WAY TO SAVE SPECIAL RELATIVITY**,*Pentcho Valev***Re: THE ONLY WAY TO SAVE SPECIAL RELATIVITY**,*Domingo Gomez Morin***Re: THE ONLY WAY TO SAVE SPECIAL RELATIVITY**,*Pentcho Valev***Re: THE ONLY WAY TO SAVE SPECIAL RELATIVITY**,*Pentcho Valev*

**Iterating the function f(x,y) = (sin(y)+x,sin(sin(y)+x)+y)**,*Richard Clark***Re: Iterating the function f(x,y) = (sin(y)+x,sin(sin(y)+x)+y)**,*Thomas.Nordhaus***Re: Iterating the function f(x,y) = (sin(y)+x,sin(sin(y)+x)+y)**,*Thomas.Nordhaus*

**Re: Iterating the function f(x,y) = (sin(y)+x,sin(sin(y)+x)+y)**,*Thomas.Nordhaus***Re: Iterating the function f(x,y) = (sin(y)+x,sin(sin(y)+x)+y)**,*Richard Clark***Re: Iterating the function f(x,y) = (sin(y)+x,sin(sin(y)+x)+y)**,*quasi***Re: Iterating the function f(x,y) = (sin(y)+x,sin(sin(y)+x)+y)**,*quasi***Re: Iterating the function f(x,y) = (sin(y)+x,sin(sin(y)+x)+y)**,*Richard Clark***Re: Iterating the function f(x,y) = (sin(y)+x,sin(sin(y)+x)+y)**,*quasi***Re: Iterating the function f(x,y) = (sin(y)+x,sin(sin(y)+x)+y)**,*Thomas.Nordhaus***Re: Iterating the function f(x,y) = (sin(y)+x,sin(sin(y)+x)+y)**,*quasi*

**Re: Iterating the function f(x,y) = (sin(y)+x,sin(sin(y)+x)+y)**,*Thomas Nordhaus*

**Proof of FLT, Fermat's Last Theorem based on 1 + 2B =C bridging A+B=C #1361 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: Proof THAT ARCHIMEDES PLUTONIUM IS A STUPID LIAR**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Proof THAT ARCHIMEDES PLUTONIUM IS A STUPID LIAR**,*Port563***Re: Proof THAT ARCHIMEDES PLUTONIUM IS A STUPID LIAR**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Proof THAT ARCHIMEDES PLUTONIUM IS A STUPID LIAR**,*Port563***Re: Proof THAT ARCHIMEDES PLUTONIUM IS A STUPID LIAR**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Proof THAT ARCHIMEDES PLUTONIUM IS A STUPID LIAR**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Proof THAT ARCHIMEDES PLUTONIUM IS A STUPID LIAR**,*Port563***Re: Proof THAT ARCHIMEDES PLUTONIUM IS A STUPID LIAR**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Proof THAT ARCHIMEDES PLUTONIUM IS A STUPID LIAR**,*Port563*

**predictions given if proof of FLT, Fermat's Last Theorem based on 1 + 2B =C #1362 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Proof of FLT, Fermat's Last Theorem based on 1 + 2B = C to bridge A + B = C #1361 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: Proof that Archimedes Plutonium is useless at math**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Proof that Archimedes Plutonium is useless at math**,*Ross A. Finlayson***which is worse demonizer-- Ross or Wizard???**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: which is worse demonizer-- Ross or Wizard???**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Ross Finlayson on perceived censorship, vandalism on sci.math**,*Ross A. Finlayson***AP apology to Mr. Ross A. Finlayson, sorry!**,*Archimedes Plutonium***AP apology to Mr. Ross A. Finlayson, and very sorry**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: Ross Finlayson on perceived censorship, vandalism on sci.math**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Ross Finlayson on perceived censorship, vandalism on sci.math**,*Ross A. Finlayson***Re: Ross Finlayson on perceived censorship, vandalism on sci.math**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*

**Missouri State University Problem Corner**,*Les***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Albrecht***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Matheology ? 413**,*Virgil*

**Algebra Column in the Goldbach proof is closure, not completeness #1359 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***----- ----- ----- Modified Conjecture**,*Deep***new concept of Algebra Column in the Goldbach proof #1358 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***ultra-superclarity Re: clarity in the formal proof of No Odd Perfect #1357 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: ultra-superclarity Re: clarity in the formal proof of No Odd Perfect #1357 Correcting Math**,*christian.bau***Re: ultra-superclarity Re: clarity in the formal proof of No Odd Perfect #1357 Correcting Math**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: ultra-superclarity Re: clarity in the formal proof of No Odd Perfect #1357 Correcting Math**,*konyberg***Re: ultra-superclarity Re: clarity in the formal proof of No Odd Perfect #1357 Correcting Math**,*konyberg***Re: ultra-superclarity Re: clarity in the formal proof of No Odd Perfect #1357 Correcting Math**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: ultra-superclarity Re: clarity in the formal proof of No Odd Perfect #1357 Correcting Math**,*Port563*

**Re: ultra-superclarity Re: clarity in the formal proof of No Odd Perfect #1357 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium*

- <Possible follow-ups>
**ultra-superclarity Re: clarity in the formal proof of No Odd Perfect #1357 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium*

**Re: review of field line plotter...**,*Chris M. Thomasson***Re: review of field line plotter...**,*Seymour J.*

**ultra-superclarity Re: clarity in the formal proof of No Odd Perfect #1356 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: ultra-superclarity that ARCH is monumentally stupid**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*

**It's Nothing Personal, It's Just Politics**,*Kevin Barry***clarity in the formal proof of No Odd Perfect #1354 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***superclarity Re: clarity in the formal proof of No Odd Perfect #1355 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***ultra-superclarity Re: clarity in the formal proof of No Odd Perfect #1356 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***ultra-superclarity Re: clarity in the formal proof of No Odd Perfect #1356 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***ultra-superclarity Re: clarity in the formal proof of No Odd Perfect #1356 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***ultra-superclarity Re: clarity in the formal proof of No Odd Perfect #1356 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium*

**Re: clarity in the formal proof of No Odd Perfect #1354 Correcting Math**,*konyberg*

**Re: VARIABLE SPEED OF LIGHT TOPPLES EINSTEIN**,*Pentcho Valev***----- ----- ----- conjecture**,*Deep***Re: ----- ----- ----- conjecture**,*Martin Shobe***Re: ----- ----- ----- conjecture**,*quasi***Re: ----- ----- ----- conjecture**,*quasi***Re: ----- ----- ----- conjecture**,*Martin Shobe*

**Re: ----- ----- ----- conjecture**,*quasi***Re: ----- ----- ----- conjecture**,*Deep***Re: ----- ----- ----- conjecture**,*Deep*

**A PROOF THAT PHYSICS IS DEAD**,*Pentcho Valev***Re: A PROOF THAT PHYSICS IS DEAD**,*Pentcho Valev*

**new structure concept-- Algebra Column in Goldbach Conjecture #1353 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***AP and Primes [serious thread]**,*Port563***Re: The set N of the natural numbers is no extensional set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Dirk Van de moortel***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Jim Burns***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Dirk Van de moortel*

**Re: There is no infinite set**,*Seymour J.***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht*

- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: There is no infinite set**,*wpihughes***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*wpihughes***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*wpihughes***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*wpihughes***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*wpihughes***Re: There is no infinite set**,*wpihughes***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Dirk Van de moortel***Re: There is no infinite set**,*WM***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Virgil***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*wpihughes***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Virgil***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*wpihughes***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Virgil***Re: There is no infinite set**,*wpihughes***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Dirk Van de moortel***Re: There is no infinite set**,*wpihughes***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Virgil***Re: There is no infinite set**,*wpihughes***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Virgil***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*wpihughes***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*wpihughes***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Dirk Van de moortel***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Dirk Van de moortel***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*wpihughes***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*wpihughes***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*wpihughes***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*wpihughes***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Virgil***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*wpihughes***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*wpihughes***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*wpihughes***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*wpihughes***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*wpihughes***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*wpihughes***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht***Re: There is no infinite set**,*wpihughes***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Dirk Van de moortel*

**Re: There is no infinite set**,*Space998***Re: There is no infinite set**,*Albrecht*

**Re: Size of ordinal for ordinal definable real**,*Seymour J.***Re: Size of ordinal for ordinal definable real**,*Peter Percival***Re: Size of ordinal for ordinal definable real**,*Aatu Koskensilta***Re: Size of ordinal for ordinal definable real**,*Peter Percival***Re: Size of ordinal for ordinal definable real**,*Ross A. Finlayson*

- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: Size of ordinal for ordinal definable real**,*Seymour J.*

**test**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: test**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*

**features of Partitions in the Constructive Proof of the Goldbach Conjecture #1352 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: features of Partitions in the Constructive Proof of the Goldbach Conjecture = THERE IS NO PROOF**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*- <Possible follow-ups>
**features of Partitions in the Constructive Proof of the Goldbach Conjecture #1352 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium*

**Publication data by area of mathematical research**,*Dan Christensen***Re: Publication data by area of mathematical research**,*Dan Christensen*

**Partitions in the Constructive Proof of the Goldbach Conjecture #1351 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: Partitions in the Constructive Proof of the Goldbach Conjecture = NO PROOF GIVEN**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Partitions in the Constructive Proof of the Goldbach Conjecture #1351 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium*

**Re: ONE proof of God. Which One?**,*fom*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: ONE proof of God. Which One?**,*Peter Percival***Re: ONE proof of God. Which One?**,*mitch***mitch's take on "Re: ONE proof of God. Which One?"**,*Ross A. Finlayson***Re: ONE proof of God. Which One?**,*Bart Goddard***Re: ONE proof of God. Which One?**,*fom***Re: ONE proof of God. Which One?**,*fom***Re: ONE proof of God. Which One?**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: ONE proof of God. Which One?**,*fom***Re: ONE proof of God. Which One?**,*Ben Bacarisse*

**Re: ONE proof of God. Which One?**,*fom*

**Re: Height differences -- statistical anomaly**,*Randy Hudson***---- ---- ---- Reference**,*Deep***Re: ---- ---- ---- Reference**,*William Elliot***Re: ---- ---- ---- Reference**,*Deep*

**Re: Ultrafilter theorem refined**,*Niels Diepeveen***Re: Ultrafilter theorem refined**,*William Elliot***Re: Ultrafilter theorem refined**,*Niels Diepeveen***Re: Ultrafilter theorem refined**,*William Elliot***Re: Ultrafilter theorem refined**,*Niels Diepeveen*

**Re: Ultrafilter theorem refined**,*Victor Porton***Re: Ultrafilter theorem refined**,*William Elliot***Re: Ultrafilter theorem refined**,*Victor Porton***Re: Ultrafilter theorem refined**,*William Elliot*

**Re: Ultrafilter theorem refined**,*Victor Porton***Re: Ultrafilter theorem refined**,*Niels Diepeveen*

**Re: Ultrafilter theorem refined**,*Victor Porton***Re: Ultrafilter theorem refined**,*Victor Porton***Re: Ultrafilter theorem refined**,*William Elliot*

**Re: Ultrafilter theorem refined**,*Victor Porton***Re: Ultrafilter theorem refined**,*Niels Diepeveen***Re: Ultrafilter theorem refined**,*Victor Porton***Re: Ultrafilter theorem refined**,*Victor Porton***Re: Ultrafilter theorem refined**,*Victor Porton***Re: Ultrafilter theorem refined**,*Niels Diepeveen*

**Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*mueckenh*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*mueckenh***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil*

**Constructive Proof of the Goldbach Conjecture #1350 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Partitions in the Constructive Proof of the Goldbach Conjecture #1351 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Constructive Proof of the Goldbach Conjecture #1350 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium*

**Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Ben Bacarisse***Re: Matheology § 413**,*mueckenh***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes***Re: Matheology § 413**,*mueckenh***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes***Re: Matheology § 413**,*mueckenh***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes***Re: Matheology § 413**,*mueckenh***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes***Re: Matheology § 413**,*mueckenh***Re: Matheology § 413**,*fom***Re: Matheology § 413**,*mueckenh***Re: Matheology § 413**,*fom***Re: Matheology § 413**,*mueckenh***Re: Matheology § 413**,*fom***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*mueckenh***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*mueckenh***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Apollyon***Re: Matheology § 413**,*fom***Re: Matheology § 413**,*mueckenh***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Apollyon***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes***Re: Matheology § 413**,*mueckenh***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes***Re: Matheology § 413**,*mueckenh***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Sam Sung***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Sam Sung***Re: Matheology ? 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology ? 413**,*Sam Sung***Re: Matheology § 413**,*mueckenh***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Sam Sung***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes***Re: Matheology § 413**,*mueckenh***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes***Re: Matheology § 413**,*mueckenh***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Sam Sung***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes***Re: Matheology § 413**,*WM***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes***Re: Matheology § 413**,*WM***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes***Re: Matheology § 413**,*WM***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes***Re: Matheology § 413**,*WM***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Sam Sung***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes***Re: Matheology § 413**,*WM***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes**Message not available***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes***Re: Matheology § 413**,*WM***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes***Re: Matheology § 413**,*WM***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes**Message not available***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes***Re: Matheology § 413**,*WM***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes***Re: Matheology § 413**,*WM***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes**Message not available***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil**Message not available***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes***Re: Matheology § 413**,*WM***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes***Re: Matheology § 413**,*WM***Re: Matheology § 413**,*wpihughes***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*WM**Message not available***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil**Message not available***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Sam Sung***Re: Matheology ? 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Sam Sung***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*WM***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*mueckenh***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil*

**Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*mueckenh***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil***Re: Matheology § 413**,*mueckenh***Re: Matheology § 413**,*Virgil*

- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: Matheology § 413**,****tozon***Re: Matheology § 413**,****tozon*

**Re: Matheology § 413**,*Sam Sung***I have a proof of the Goldbach Conjecture dating back to 1992, but never explained well enough #1347 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***THE FALSE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS**,*Pentcho Valev***Re: THE FALSE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS**,*Pentcho Valev*

**can Google stop the censoring delay of AP posts to sci.math?**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: can Google stop the censoring delay of AP posts to sci.math?**,*Port563***Re: can Google stop the censoring delay of AP posts to sci.math?**,*George Cornelius*

**Re: can Google stop the censoring delay of AP posts to sci.math?**,*George Cornelius***Re: can Google stop the censoring delay of AP posts to sci.math?**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*

**refuting Mike Ecker Re: Final formal proof of No Odd Perfect Number #1345**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: EINSTEINIANS LEAVE THE SINKING SHIP**,*Pentcho Valev***Re: Golden ratio (phi) in applied math?**,*William Elliot***Re: Golden ratio (phi) in applied math?**,*quasi*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: Golden ratio (phi) in applied math?**,*Port563***Re: Golden ratio (phi) in applied math?**,*Space998***Re: Golden ratio (phi) in applied math?**,*Space998*

**Re: Ultrafilter Question**,*William Elliot***Re: Ultrafilter Question**,*Victor Porton***Re: Ultrafilter Question**,*William Elliot*

- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: Ultrafilter Question**,*William Elliot*

**Re: Great Math Tricks on youtube**,*Christopher J. Henrich*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: Great Math Tricks on youtube**,*Christopher J. Henrich***Re: Great Math Tricks on youtube**,*Thomas.Nordhaus*

**Re: preliminary formal proof Re: formal proof that No Odd Perfect Number exists #1340 Correcting Math**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: preliminary formal proof Re: formal proof that No Odd Perfect Number exists #1340 Correcting Math**,*christian.bau*

**Re: reciprocals without k/k Re: formal proof that No Odd Perfect Number exists #1341 Correcting Math - STILL WRONG !!**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Final formal proof of No Odd Perfect Number #1343 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: Final formal proof of No Odd Perfect Number #1343 Correcting Math**,*Dr. Mike Ecker***refuting Mike Ecker Re: Final formal proof of No Odd Perfect Number #1343 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: Final formal proof of No Odd Perfect Number #1343 Correcting Math**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Dr. Ecker Pennsylvania State U. reconsiders AP's No Odd Perfect Proof**,*Archimedes Plutonium*

**improvement of Final formal proof of No Odd Perfect Number #1344 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***improvements Re: Final formal proof of No Odd Perfect Number #1343 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: Final formal proof of No Odd Perfect Number #1343 Correcting Math**,*christian.bau***Re: Final formal proof of No Odd Perfect Number #1343 Correcting Math**,*David Bernier***Re: Final formal proof of No Odd Perfect Number #1343 Correcting Math**,*christian.bau***Re: Final formal proof of No Odd Perfect Number #1343 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: Final formal proof of No Odd Perfect Number #1343 Correcting Math**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: Final formal proof of No Odd Perfect Number #1343 Correcting Math**,*christian.bau***are all professors of mathematics like that of Mr. Bau and Mr. Ecker?**,*Archimedes Plutonium***making it more clear to both Mr. Bau and Mr. Ecker**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: making it more clear to both Mr. Bau and Mr. Ecker**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: making it more clear to both Mr. Bau and Mr. Ecker THAT ARCH IS A MONUMENTALLY STUPID**,*Wizard-Of-Oz***Re: are all professors of mathematics like that of Mr. Bau and Mr. Ecker?**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*

**Re: Final formal proof of No Odd Perfect Number #1346 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: Final formal proof of No Odd Perfect Number #1346 Correcting Math**,*Peter Percival***Re: Final formal proof of No Odd Perfect Number #1346 Correcting Math**,*Archimedes Plutonium***Re: Final formal proof of No Odd Perfect Number #1346 Correcting Math**,*Wizard-Of-Oz*