Prev: where is the factorial value 1/2 of the exponent value in 10^500 #4.13 Correcting Math
Next: Lwalk or Mr. Transfer P becoming the third human to do the only valid correct Indirect Euclid IP #4.14 Correcting Math
From: Archimedes Plutonium on 24 Jul 2010 03:03 Archimedes Plutonium wrote: (snipped a far too long of a post, but it did show two proofs of Riemann Hypothesis) > > I do not know whether the Twin Primes can construct rectangles in > whirling rectangles as an > independent proof of the Riemann Hypothesis, or, whether the Twin > Primes proof which yields very long thin rectangles acts to bolster > the above proof of RH. > > In other words, I am not sure whether all of this goes to making one > proof of RH or whether > I have two independent proofs of RH. > I meant that I would thus have 3 independent proofs of RH, provided if the Twin Primes proof along with Polignac proof were independent. Let me meander for a moment on this topic. You see, the Twin Primes with Polignac offer a more strict placement of the primes and that is what the RH is about, that the primes are all on the 1/2 Real strip. But let me meander to another idea, which maybe the equivalent statement to the RH statement. We know the proof that between n and 2n exists a prime. But do we know that between N and 2N inclusive must exist two primes? So let me try it out starting with 2 2 goes 4 and gives 2,3 3 goes 6 and gives 3,5 4 goes 8 and gives 5,7 5 goes 10 and gives 5,7 So with the "inclusive requirement" it looks like clear sailing that between N and 2N inclusive always exists two primes. Now I wonder if that statement is what can be the equivalent of the Riemann Hypothesis. That the spacing of the primes has to be so delicate, so intricate as to provide two primes in such an interval of N and 2N inclusive. And with the proof of Twin Primes infinitude, only helps with the above. Archimedes Plutonium http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/ whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies |