Re: Mystery rejection, 3-d prime counting function

From: David C. Ullrich (ullrich_at_math.okstate.edu)
Date: 06/27/04 

Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2004 07:51:38 -0500

On 26 Jun 2004 14:25:25 -0700, jstevh@msn.com (James Harris) wrote:

>Gib Bogle <bogle@ihug.too.much.spam.co.nz> wrote in message news:<cbited$8o2$1@lust.ihug.co.nz>...
>> James Harris wrote:
>>
>> > But are there any rational people out there who might comment as well?
>>
>> By your definition, anyone who disagrees with you and/or points out your
>> error, is not rational. Therefore the answer to your question is: only
>> one or two similarly deluded individuals.
>
>Nope. If I'm wrong it's easy to show by simply putting up a link to
>mathematical research that looks like mine.
>
>In the past posters have lied by saying my discovery is just
>Legendre's, but sci.physics and sci.math readers can just *LOOK* at
>Legendre's Formula:
>
>http://164.8.13.169/Enciklopedija/math/math/l/l170.htm
>
>Then they can look at my work and compare:
>
>http://mathforprofit.blogspot.com/
>
>And Legendre's is actually broken up into *two* functions where you
>first see this phi(x,a) at the top, and then pi(x) is defined by it.
>
>But with my discovery, you have p(x,y) and p(x,sqrt(x)) gives the
>count of primes.

This is much funnier than most of the things you say. In the
course of trying to explain why the two are radically
different you actually point out large _similarlities_
between the two! If you said a little more about Legendre's
method you'd actually be explaining why the two are
essentially identical.

Nice work.

>There aren't any helper functions that go along with it.
>
>Now that's an example of *rational* points being made.
>
>If someone comes along and just declares that they are the same, then
>I can reasonably question that person's rationality.
>
>I have the facts on my side.
>
>The mathematical literature is out there people.
>
>If I'm wrong, prove it from the literature.
>
>
>James Harris

************************

David C. Ullrich

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Mystery rejection, 3-d prime counting function
    ... >> one or two similarly deluded individuals. ... >mathematical research that looks like mine. ... >In the past posters have lied by saying my discovery is just ... >The mathematical literature is out there people. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Mystery rejection, 3-d prime counting function
    ... > jstevh@msn.com (James Harris) wrote: ... >> mathematical research that looks like mine. ... >> In the past posters have lied by saying my discovery is just ... my implementation of the prime counting function is ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Mystery rejection, 3-d prime counting function
    ... > jstevh@msn.com (James Harris) wrote: ... >> mathematical research that looks like mine. ... >> In the past posters have lied by saying my discovery is just ... my implementation of the prime counting function is ...
    (sci.math)
Quantcast