proof of Goldbach conjecture
in [Math]
|
From: Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr. on 3 Dec 2009 03:10 On Dec 1, 5:51 am, eestath <stathopoulo...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > integers exist > That is indeed a bold statement. ONE must be really brilliant TWO make such a claim FOUR himself. > > Every integer greater or equal then 2 is a product of primes to an > integer power. > Thus integers exist! > Who told you that primes exist? For example, my Safeway has no prime beef products at all. Bummer.
From: Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr. on 3 Dec 2009 03:19 On Dec 2, 12:07 pm, Tonico <Tonic...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Dec 2, 8:22 pm, eestath <stathopoulo...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > what i am going to do with you Arturo! > > > i have a lot of fun with you:) > > > you are funny :) > > > try to post somewhere you can understand what is going on > > > i found the proof in 10 minutes and you are asking silly questions 2 > > days! > > > if someone understand what i am saying please explain to him! > > > with you is a waste of time...ask a coworker or someone smarter than > > you! > > > you undergoing these 5 stages: > > DENIAL > > ANGER > > BARGAINING > > DIPRESSION > > ACCEPTANCE! > > It was just a matter of time: after so many trolls, cranks, or simply > stupid individuals, the group has finally met a deranged person: > eestath > Perhaps it's funny, perhaps it's sad, or perhaps it's neither, but it > is new...at least for me. > What puzzles me is that he uses actual math notation and knows the terms like "integer", "prime", "every", "satisfy" and "rational", without being able to make any logical sense whatsoever. Does he still claim that the ratio of two primes is irrational?
From: Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr. on 3 Dec 2009 03:25 On Dec 2, 11:43 pm, eestath <stathopoulo...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > There is a story about a Turkish reformer who wanted to discourage > women from wearing the veil. Instead of attempting to forbid it > directly (the mathematicians approach), he issued a decree that all > prostitutes must wear veils. > Given that prostitution in Muslim countries is a severely punishable crime, why would prostitutes oblige? To make it easier for the policemen to apprehend and arrest them? > > This indirect trick proved the > workable, effective way to his objective and shows the sort of > thinking which chessplayers are often rather good at. > Chessplayers are illogical? Or do they assume their opponents to be illogical? I don't think so. Chessplayers plan for the worst case.
From: Tim Little on 3 Dec 2009 04:58 On 2009-12-03, Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr. <ostap_bender_1900(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > On Dec 2, 11:43 pm, eestath <stathopoulo...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> There is a story about a Turkish reformer who wanted to discourage >> women from wearing the veil. Instead of attempting to forbid it >> directly (the mathematician's approach), he issued a decree that all >> prostitutes must wear veils. > > Given that prostitution in Muslim countries is a severely punishable > crime, why would prostitutes oblige? To make it easier for the > policemen to apprehend and arrest them? The aim is not that prostitutes would thenceforth wear veils, but that non-prostitutes may cease wearing veils, as they do not want to appear to be complying with a legal requirement that applies only to prostitutes. - Tim
From: Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr. on 3 Dec 2009 05:09
On Dec 3, 1:58 am, Tim Little <t...(a)little-possums.net> wrote: > On 2009-12-03, Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr. <ostap_bender_1...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > On Dec 2, 11:43 pm, eestath <stathopoulo...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> There is a story about a Turkish reformer who wanted to discourage > >> women from wearing the veil. Instead of attempting to forbid it > >> directly (the mathematicians approach), he issued a decree that all > >> prostitutes must wear veils. > > > Given that prostitution in Muslim countries is a severely punishable > > crime, why would prostitutes oblige? To make it easier for the > > policemen to apprehend and arrest them? > > The aim is not that prostitutes would thenceforth wear veils, but that > non-prostitutes may cease wearing veils, as they do not want to appear > to be complying with a legal requirement that applies only to > prostitutes. > > - Tim I guess this will work with illogical women... oops, was that a redundancy? |