Hello, who could be able to endorse me so that I can publish on arxiv about Riemann Hypothesis?

magox · 2016-07-04, 17:37

I actually demonstrate that Riemann hypothesis is false.

Does anybody is interested? I'll send you the paper by mail befor you may endorse me.

Please!

And have a nice day/night.

Tom

xilman · 2016-07-04, 17:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by magox

I actually demonstrate that Riemann hypothesis is false.

Does anybody is interested? I'll send you the paper by mail befor you may endorse me.

Please!

And have a nice day/night.

Tom

Post a link to your paper here. There are several members who could take a quick look and then decide whether it's worth endorsing you.

rogue · 2016-07-04, 18:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by xilman

Post a link to your paper here. There are several members who could take a quick look and then decide whether it's worth endorsing you.

At first I thought you wrote "educating" instead of "endorsing" so I had to read that again. I can only imagine what RDS would write.

science_man_88 · 2016-07-04, 18:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by rogue

I can only imagine what RDS would write.

Probably would depend on mood. If in a bad mood already the fact that the OP has typographical errors in his post here might be enough to set RDS off on a rampage. someone who hasn't mastered the english language in type is going to solve a mathematical hypothesis that hasn't been solved in hundreds of years since it's posing ?

danaj · 2016-07-04, 18:43

I hear vixra is nice this time of year...

CRGreathouse · 2016-07-04, 23:49

Just to ensure communication: the above posters don't believe that your paper demonstrates the falsity of the Riemann Hypothesis. viXra is a place where cranks post their papers, although admittedly there have been some respectable mathematicians who have for some reason left papers there as well. It was a good idea but circumstances are such that few would read anything posted there.

CRGreathouse · 2016-07-04, 23:59

As an example of its level of quality, here is a non-exhaustive list of some of the proof which have appeared on viXra this year claiming to prove or disprove the Riemann Hypothesis (giving only viXra identifiers here):
1606.0065
1605.0229
1605.0066
1604.0132
1602.0096/1602.0100
1601.0281

danaj · 2016-07-05, 00:47

In concept, viXra is sort of like arXiv, but with no endorsement requirement or other filters.

The reality is as Charles says: it is mostly full of crank papers, and papers put there will likely have a bad reputation just because the quality is so low. It would accomplish the purpose of getting the work published, and a few people will see it, but not much else. You'd probably be better off publishing it yourself first, or at least giving some idea of how you proceed.

Mostly the problem is that there are *lots* of people that think they can prove or disprove the Riemann Hypothesis, as witnessed by Charles' list. At this point just the act of saying "I have a proof" makes it an almost certainty that you do not. That you believe you have, without any others having given feedback, just adds weight to this.

Dubslow · 2016-07-05, 01:06

I would argue that it's a well known fact that there are tons of crank papers on viXra (and even the author freely admits to such), but that there are a number of valid papers as well. The crank papers may be merely ignored, utterly so, by design.

As such, "level of quality" isn't a very good measure since by design there is no moderation of quality.

CRGreathouse · 2016-07-05, 02:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dubslow

I would argue that it's a well known fact that there are tons of crank papers on viXra (and even the author freely admits to such), but that there are a number of valid papers as well.

True -- R. J. Mathar has a few papers there, and they're totally legit. Probably a few others as well. But the problem is, as Dana puts it:

Quote:

Originally Posted by danaj

The reality is as Charles says: it is mostly full of crank papers, and papers put there will likely have a bad reputation just because the quality is so low.

At this point it's not really a useful place to find or leave papers.

Dubslow · 2016-07-06, 02:58

I argue it's a chicken and egg problem -- it has a bad reputation because people give it a bad reputation. It has tons of bad papers, and by some arbitrary metric of "average paper quality" it has a low score, and because of that, people assign *every* paper there a bad rap.

It may not be a good place to find papers objectively speaking and I agree, but it's not a good place to leave papers merely because of outside perception (i.e. that's a subjective statement independent of the "average quality metric"). If I put a paper there and asked people here to read it, would I immediately be labeled a crank merely because of my choice of hosting? I surely could not put a paper on arXiv even if I wanted to (short of making a post here identical to OP's, upon which I might be judged differently only because of my history here, not because of the content of my OP).

[Another point to make is that I surely haven't displayed any signs of being able to write a paper to either arXiv or viXra, but hopefully the thought experiment gets my point across.]

2016-07-04, 17:37	#1
magox Jul 2016 1 Posts	Hello, who could be able to endorse me so that I can publish on arxiv about Riemann Hypothesis? I actually demonstrate that Riemann hypothesis is false. Does anybody is interested? I'll send you the paper by mail befor you may endorse me. Please! And have a nice day/night. Tom

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Connection to the Riemann's hypothesis	kurtulmehtap	Math	17	2009-10-17 15:40
The Riemann Hypothesis at 150	ewmayer	Math	0	2009-10-09 16:50
Riemann's hypothesis is incorrect a proof	Carl Fischbach	Miscellaneous Math	62	2008-11-11 14:00
Riemann Hypothesis according to Bearnol	bearnol	Miscellaneous Math	20	2006-08-01 14:08
Riemann Hypothesis is false?????	georgekh	Miscellaneous Math	3	2004-12-02 18:45

2016-07-04, 18:43	#5
danaj "Dana Jacobsen" Feb 2011 Bangkok, TH 3²·101 Posts	I hear vixra is nice this time of year...

2016-07-04, 23:49	#6
CRGreathouse Aug 2006 1011101011011₂ Posts	Just to ensure communication: the above posters don't believe that your paper demonstrates the falsity of the Riemann Hypothesis. viXra is a place where cranks post their papers, although admittedly there have been some respectable mathematicians who have for some reason left papers there as well. It was a good idea but circumstances are such that few would read anything posted there.

2016-07-04, 23:59	#7
CRGreathouse Aug 2006 3·1,993 Posts	As an example of its level of quality, here is a non-exhaustive list of some of the proof which have appeared on viXra this year claiming to prove or disprove the Riemann Hypothesis (giving only viXra identifiers here): 1606.0065 1605.0229 1605.0066 1604.0132 1602.0096/1602.0100 1601.0281

2016-07-05, 00:47	#8
danaj "Dana Jacobsen" Feb 2011 Bangkok, TH 3²·101 Posts	In concept, viXra is sort of like arXiv, but with no endorsement requirement or other filters. The reality is as Charles says: it is mostly full of crank papers, and papers put there will likely have a bad reputation just because the quality is so low. It would accomplish the purpose of getting the work published, and a few people will see it, but not much else. You'd probably be better off publishing it yourself first, or at least giving some idea of how you proceed. Mostly the problem is that there are lots of people that think they can prove or disprove the Riemann Hypothesis, as witnessed by Charles' list. At this point just the act of saying "I have a proof" makes it an almost certainty that you do not. That you believe you have, without any others having given feedback, just adds weight to this.

2016-07-05, 01:06	#9
Dubslow Basketry That Evening! "Bunslow the Bold" Jun 2011 40<A<43 -89<O<-88 1C35₁₆ Posts	I would argue that it's a well known fact that there are tons of crank papers on viXra (and even the author freely admits to such), but that there are a number of valid papers as well. The crank papers may be merely ignored, utterly so, by design. As such, "level of quality" isn't a very good measure since by design there is no moderation of quality.

2016-07-06, 02:58	#11
Dubslow Basketry That Evening! "Bunslow the Bold" Jun 2011 40<A<43 -89<O<-88 3×29×83 Posts	I argue it's a chicken and egg problem -- it has a bad reputation because people give it a bad reputation. It has tons of bad papers, and by some arbitrary metric of "average paper quality" it has a low score, and because of that, people assign every paper there a bad rap. It may not be a good place to find papers objectively speaking and I agree, but it's not a good place to leave papers merely because of outside perception (i.e. that's a subjective statement independent of the "average quality metric"). If I put a paper there and asked people here to read it, would I immediately be labeled a crank merely because of my choice of hosting? I surely could not put a paper on arXiv even if I wanted to (short of making a post here identical to OP's, upon which I might be judged differently only because of my history here, not because of the content of my OP). [Another point to make is that I surely haven't displayed any signs of being able to write a paper to either arXiv or viXra, but hopefully the thought experiment gets my point across.]