mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Extra Stuff > Miscellaneous Math

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2006-07-30, 12:11   #12
cyrix
 
Jul 2003
Thuringia; Germany

728 Posts
Default

Hi bearnol!

Your "proof" provides nothing, and is also false.


First: What do you show?
If your "proof" would be correct, it would only show, that the zeors of the zeta function are lying symmetric to the line Re(s)=1/2. So there is no argument, that there weren´t zeros not lying on this line (it would then only postulating another zero on the other side of this line).

And to the content:
Your multiplication of the powerseries is not so obivius correct, for me (the equivalenz of the two terms you provided is not much not justified): Every addend is multiplied with another factor, so why should the two sums beeing equal?

Where and how do you use the fact, that for every nontrivial zero of the zeta function 0<Re(s)<1? For a trivial zero , e.g. s= -2, your "proof" would imply, that a positiv real is also a solution of zeta(s)=0; here 1-[-2]=3; which is obiusly false.


Do you really think, that you are such a good mathematician, that the greatest mathematicians in the past 100 years, including Hardy, Ramanujan, Hilbert and Erdös,..., all oversaw such a short proof, but you find it?


Cyrix
cyrix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-07-30, 14:48   #13
bearnol
 
bearnol's Avatar
 
Sep 2005

12710 Posts
Default

Hi Cyrix,
Thanks for your interest.
However I really don't see why you people are having so much of a problem with this! It's clear (I would even say crystal clear) to me! :))))))
Oh, well - I tried...
thanks for taking a look at it, anyway,
J
bearnol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-07-30, 15:50   #14
mfgoode
Bronze Medalist
 
mfgoode's Avatar
 
Jan 2004
Mumbai,India

22·33·19 Posts
Cool RH Bearnol

Quote:
Originally Posted by bearnol
Hi Cyrix,
Thanks for your interest.
However I really don't see why you people are having so much of a problem with this! It's clear (I would even say crystal clear) to me! :))))))
Oh, well - I tried...
thanks for taking a look at it, anyway,
J

Please dont take it personally in the term used. I am merely quoting Shakespeare in Macbeth who forethought a situation such as this.

"A tale told by an idiot--full of sound and fury, signifying nothing"

Regards,
Mally
mfgoode is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-07-30, 20:18   #15
jinydu
 
jinydu's Avatar
 
Dec 2003
Hopefully Near M48

2×3×293 Posts
Default

To reiterate what previous users have said, how can you claim that:

\Large{\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}n**s=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}n**s.n**(2s-1)}

?

And what on earth does ** mean anyway?
jinydu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-07-30, 20:23   #16
akruppa
 
akruppa's Avatar
 
"Nancy"
Aug 2002
Alexandria

9A316 Posts
Default

In some programming languages, ** is the exponentiaton operator. I'd hardly call it "standard notation", though.

Alex
akruppa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-07-31, 16:47   #17
ewmayer
2ω=0
 
ewmayer's Avatar
 
Sep 2002
República de California

1166110 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cyrix
Do you really think, that you are such a good mathematician, that the greatest mathematicians in the past 100 years, including Hardy, Ramanujan, Hilbert and Erdös,..., all oversaw such a short proof, but you find it?
Well, in James' (a.k.a. Bearnol's) defense, the greatest physicists and engineers in history also failed to discover a perpetual motion machine (some of the nattering negativists among them even claim to have proven that such is impossible - the glass is always half-empty with some people), but in fact also there James has cut through thousands of years of obfuscatory illogic masquerading as science in his usual Alexander-versus-the-Gordian-Knot fashion and in a few short strokes of his keyboard, given us just such a thing. In his limitless generosity, he's even made it available for all -- well, at least those with a quantafragalistic Casimir field convertor and a lossless room-temperature-superconducting zircon-encrusted dual Mo"bius strip (available at Ace's hardware and other fine home-improvement stores everywhere) -- via the Gnu General Public License. Apparently his invention has passed muster with the respected International Society for Measurement and Control (ISA), so I propose, in honor of his genius and selflessness, naming the resulting device the James Wanless ISA Crank. Do I hear a second?
ewmayer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-07-31, 17:54   #18
xilman
Bamboozled!
 
xilman's Avatar
 
"𒉺𒌌𒇷𒆷𒀭"
May 2003
Down not across

101010110011002 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ewmayer
Well, in James' (a.k.a. Bearnol's) defense, the greatest physicists and engineers in history also failed to discover a perpetual motion machine (some of the nattering negativists among them even claim to have proven that such is impossible - the glass is always half-empty with some people), but in fact also there James has cut through thousands of years of obfuscatory illogic masquerading as science in his usual Alexander-versus-the-Gordian-Knot fashion and in a few short strokes of his keyboard, given us just such a thing. In his limitless generosity, he's even made it available for all -- well, at least those with a quantafragalistic Casimir field convertor and a lossless room-temperature-superconducting zircon-encrusted dual Mo"bius strip (available at Ace's hardware and other fine home-improvement stores everywhere) -- via the Gnu General Public License. Apparently his invention has passed muster with the respected International Society for Measurement and Control (ISA), so I propose, in honor of his genius and selflessness, naming the resulting device the James Wanless ISA Crank. Do I hear a second?
Don't be too hard on him. Every village has had one from times immemorial and, in these networked times, every forum, newsgroup and mailing list has (at least) one too.

Paul
xilman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-07-31, 18:56   #19
ewmayer
2ω=0
 
ewmayer's Avatar
 
Sep 2002
República de California

2D8D16 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xilman
Don't be too hard on him. Every village has had one from times immemorial and, in these networked times, every forum, newsgroup and mailing list has (at least) one too.

Paul
I wasn't being hard on him, I was attempting to sing his praises as best as these poor instruments called "words" will allow. I'm shocked that my missive could be misconstrued so, um, shockingly.
ewmayer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-07-31, 23:31   #20
Fusion_power
 
Fusion_power's Avatar
 
Aug 2003
Snicker, AL

7·137 Posts
Default

If you compress a silicon crystal, it releases a small amount of electricity when it returns to its normal state. Just set up the plates for the casimir effect so that it compresses a crystal. Quantum fluctuations would cause variations in the pressure which would permit the crystal to convert the mechanical energy into electicity. Now we have a practical application for Bearnol's perpetual motion machine. All we need is someone to build it!

Fusion
Fusion_power is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-08-01, 14:08   #21
Patrick123
 
Patrick123's Avatar
 
Jan 2006
JHB, South Africa

15710 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xilman
(at least) one too.
Paul
Whoops I see a new theorem coming along - ability to count with only half the numbers

Patrick
Patrick123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hello, who could be able to endorse me so that I can publish on arxiv about Riemann Hypothesis? magox Math 12 2016-07-07 03:01
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 is false????? georgekh Miscellaneous Math 3 2004-12-02 18:45

All times are UTC. The time now is 20:45.


Mon Oct 25 20:45:33 UTC 2021 up 94 days, 15:14, 0 users, load averages: 1.82, 1.88, 2.05

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.