Prev: JSH: Prime gap equation consequences
Next: valid Indirect Euclid IP leads to twin prime proof #4.12 Correcting Math
From: Jon on 24 Jul 2010 00:20
Can anyone tell me why this works?

http://jons-math.bravehost.com/eandpi.html

I deduced it qualitatively. How can you prove it?
From: Virgil on 24 Jul 2010 00:43
In article <psudnbNgP4yS99fRnZ2dnUVZ_hqdnZ2d(a)earthlink.com>,
"Jon" <jon8338(a)peoplepc.com> wrote:

> http://jons-math.bravehost.com/eandpi.html

I find that you first summation is about 1.58195 which is not half of pi.

I find that you second sum works out to be about 16.4, which is not even
close to half of pi.
From: Tim Little on 24 Jul 2010 02:59
On 2010-07-24, Tim Little <tim(a)little-possums.net> wrote:
> On 2010-07-24, Jon <jon8338(a)peoplepc.com> wrote:
>> I deduced it qualitatively. How can you prove it?
>
> It can't be proven, because it is false.

Also, now having seen exactly the same post in sci.math and
alt.math.recreational, don't multi-post. That is, don't make separate
posts with identical content in each group. It is quite rude: it
means answers from one group will not be seen in the other leading to
duplication of replies, and people reading both groups will see it
twice which is spammy.

If you want something seen in two groups, list both of them in the
same post (like I have for this reply). If you have a broken news
client that won't allow that, either choose one group or get a better
client.


- Tim
From: Barry Schwarz on 24 Jul 2010 13:32
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 22:43:15 -0600, Virgil <Virgil(a)home.esc> wrote:

>In article <psudnbNgP4yS99fRnZ2dnUVZ_hqdnZ2d(a)earthlink.com>,
> "Jon" <jon8338(a)peoplepc.com> wrote:
>
>> http://jons-math.bravehost.com/eandpi.html
>
>I find that you first summation is about 1.58195 which is not half of pi.
>
>I find that you second sum works out to be about 16.4, which is not even
>close to half of pi.

I think you lost a minus sign. That doesn't change the fact that the
second sum is wrong also, just not by that much.

--
Remove del for email
From: Jon on 24 Jul 2010 22:30

"Virgil" <Virgil(a)home.esc> wrote in message
news:Virgil-8F0A7F.22431423072010(a)bignews.usenetmonster.com...
> In article <psudnbNgP4yS99fRnZ2dnUVZ_hqdnZ2d(a)earthlink.com>,
> "Jon" <jon8338(a)peoplepc.com> wrote:
>
>> http://jons-math.bravehost.com/eandpi.html
>
> I find that you first summation is about 1.58195 which is not half of pi.
>
> I find that you second sum works out to be about 16.4, which is not even
> close to half of pi.

It's close enough to be of significance.

 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2
Prev: JSH: Prime gap equation consequences
Next: valid Indirect Euclid IP leads to twin prime proof #4.12 Correcting Math