proof of Goldbach conjecture
in [Math]
|
From: eestath on 1 Dec 2009 03:12 You didn' t even read the assumption!
From: eestath on 1 Dec 2009 03:23 it should be changed to different from 2^(p+q)/=2^(2k)=> 2*2^(p/q)/=2^(2k/q)
From: eestath on 1 Dec 2009 03:25 The only mistake is: 2^(p+q)=2^(2k)=> it should be: 2^(p+q)/=2^(2k)
From: Henry on 1 Dec 2009 04:25 On 1 Dec, 08:12, eestath <stathopoulo...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > You didn' t even read the assumption! I tried. But when you use /= (different from) you sometimes seem to mean "not the same value" and sometimes "sharing no property" such as irrationality or oddness. The latter would be an error, as in: Plato is different from Socrates. Socrates is dead. *So Plato is not dead.
From: eestath on 1 Dec 2009 04:47
I explain every time what different from means is easy to understand what i am talking about if you read carefully! first i say that is different from p+q/=2k (integers diferent from integers) 2^(p+q)=2^(2k) (integers different from integers) 2*2^(p/q)/=2^(2k/q) [2*2^(p/q) is allways irrational different from both rational and irrational 2^(2k/q) but from the assumption it couldn't be irrational] So it must be rational. p/=q*(2w-1) (integers different from integers or odd different from odd [contradiction]) |