A proof for the worlds largest prime

[Dr Sardonicus]

Originally Posted by CRGreathouse

For some reason, though, claimants usually get shy once asked for exponents. I mean, for all the miracle methods I've heard about I don't think a single one has provided a novel Mersenne exponent.

I tend to agree.

However, my own prediction in factors with multiplicity that

the poster might be leery of announcing a result that might soon be checked and proved wrong

came to grief rather quickly on the next page of the thread. A proper factor of a claimed Mersenne prime was found in three and a half hours!

So please -- if you have some exponents, bring 'em on! Perhaps the three and a half hour time can be bettered.

[Batalov]

We have the whole thread for those proofs: 'Do-it-yourself, crank, mersenne prediction thread.'

It has been neglected lately!

[axn]

Originally Posted by Dr Sardonicus

came to grief rather quickly on the next page of the thread.

Aside: Best not to link to/talk about "pages", seeing as the forum allows you to customize the number of threads per page. Instead link to posts/post numbers.

[That Don Guy]

Originally Posted by ModeEric

I have managed to come up with a proof in order to prove that infinitely many Messene's primes exist, because I have found a way to generate a select few of them. However, I want credit for them, so would anyone know where I should share my discoveries in order to publish it?

Haven't we had this conversation before - when David Fabian claimed that he had discovered what he claimed was Fermat's "simple" proof for his Last Theorem offered it on eBay for something like $1 million, and then, when there were no takers (and it turned out that the proof turned out to be longer than originally claimed), he asked on the rec.puzzles newsgroup in early 2009 what was the best way to profit from it?

Here's the rec.puzzles thread:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!ms...k/zkUrKnd1OvoJ

[Dr Sardonicus]

Originally Posted by That Don Guy

Haven't we had this conversation before - when David Fabian claimed that he had discovered what he claimed was Fermat's "simple" proof for his Last Theorem offered it on eBay for something like $1 million, and then, when there were no takers (and it turned out that the proof turned out to be longer than originally claimed), he asked on the rec.puzzles newsgroup in early 2009 what was the best way to profit from it?

Here's the rec.puzzles thread:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!ms...k/zkUrKnd1OvoJ

And, there was the ever-popular Prime number for sale on eBay thread. As your humble servant pointed out in this post, eBay's rules don't allow putting "digitally delivered goods" up for bid. You have to put such a thing in a classified, and name your price.

[LaurV]

Well, if you ask for one million, then you may have something....

First thing coming to our mind is "how can we profit from it?". So we came with the following idea: We will give you $500k (no joke, we can put the money in escrow) if the proof is valid, but if the proof is not valid, you give us $100k. We make all legal with a contract signed and stamped by an attorney, and place the money in escrow. Both parts. Then you show your proof. Otherwise, get the hack out of here...

[a1call]

The OP author seems to have gone long time ago, so the request for him to leave seems inhospitable and unnecessary.
One important thing missing from your offer is, who exactly is going to decide if the proof is valid.

[Dr Sardonicus]

Originally Posted by a1call

The OP author seems to have gone long time ago, so the request for him to leave seems inhospitable and unnecessary.
One important thing missing from your offer is, who exactly is going to decide if the proof is valid.

In On the History of Fermat’s Last Theorem: A Down-to-Earth Approach we find the following, regarding the validity of "proofs" of FLT after the offering in 1908 of the Wolfskehl Prize of 100,000 Marks. (Be it noted, the prize was seriously diminished by hyperinflation after WWI, and was ultimately awarded to Andrew Wiles.)

Another Göttingen mathematician whose name became associated with FLT and the Wolfskehl prize, and not precisely in a positive sense, was the leading number theorist Edmund Landau (1877-1938). Landau was a distinguished Berlin mathematician who in 1909 was appointed to Göttingen following the sudden death of Minkowski.

Soon after his arrival he was commissioned with handling the Wolfskhel prize, and the dreary, unending correspondence associated with it. In order to cope with this rather unpleasant task, it is well known that Landau printed a standard answer in the following terms,

Dear ........,

Thank you for your manuscript on the proof of Fermat's Last Theorem.

The first mistake is on:
Page ...... Line .....

This invalidates the proof.

Professor E. M. Landau

He would then ask a student to read any manuscript sent and to fill in the missing details.

[a1call]

Well, this is the global internetwork which provides access to all citizens of the Earth with a full spectrum of mathematical insights. It is illogical to assume that any given person or group of persons, even has the mathematical knowledge to comprehend all possible formulated proofs, yet alone have the authority to decide if any of all such proofs are valid or not.

[storm5510]

Originally Posted by ModeEric

I have managed to come up with a proof in order to prove that infinitely many Messene's primes exist, because I have found a way to generate a select few of them. However, I want credit for them, so would anyone know where I should share my discoveries in order to publish it?

You will have to do much more than this! Your "proof" will have to be ran through the mill, so to speak, to see if it holds up. Suggestion: Submit four of your exponents for testing. These would need to be larger than any on the list which have been proven. If you are not willing to do this then you are simply wasting the time of everyone here.

[LaurV]

Originally Posted by a1call

One important thing missing from your offer is, who exactly is going to decide if the proof is valid.

Me. With my scarce skill, I will be able to dismount any proof that fits on one page, or even 10 pages as he later claimed. This book (and few other) could be my guide. When a clever guy spends 406 pages just to show what other people tried to do without success, I can't believe somebody can fit a proof in 10 pages, sorry...

Edit: mind that those 400 pages are calculus, theorems, demonstrations, not text and journalism. And it is for amateurs, like me and you. Any idiot claiming to have a simple proof for FLT should read such books first. (And please don't assume I didn't try my own "proof", hehe).