sci.math
https://groups.google.com/d/forum/sci.math
Mathematical discussions and pursuits.enf(s) = g(c - s) revisited. conjectures included.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/kFc4fd7HUgA/V0yTX0WwCQAJ
Conjecture: The following is never true for all x, f(x) = g(c - x). x is a real variable. c is a real non-zero constant. f and g are different functions of one real variable. f and g are defined for all x. f and g are different functions. ----------------------------------------https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/kFc4fd7HUgA
Simon RobertsWed, 24 Aug 2016 06:01:42 UTCa^2 + b^2 = 0 (mod p)
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/CCE1tVd8B5c/G4WLpVqvCQAJ
p is an odd prime, a and b are non zero integers. Can a^2 + b^2 = 0 (mod p) or a^2 = -b^2 (mod p) ? Under what conditions TRUE and under what conditions FALSE? Thank You. -Simon Roberts rete...@gmail.comhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/CCE1tVd8B5c
Simon RobertsWed, 24 Aug 2016 05:44:54 UTCEuler sum that is related to the Riemann Zeta Function.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/4olppAYyepk/NPJU11OtCQAJ
Version 3.5 E(s) = Sum_{1 to oo}[1 + 1/2^s + 1/3^s + 1/4^s + ....] and s is a complex variable. Euler showed: E(s) = PRODUCT_p[1/( 1 - p^(-s))]. p is prime. E(s) = PRODUCT_p[p^s/( p^s - 1)]. F(s) = PRODUCT_p[1/(p^s - 1)] = -/+E(-s) E(s) / [F(s)] = +/-E(s)/E(-s) = +/-PRODUCT_p[p^s] Let s =https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/4olppAYyepk
Simon RobertsWed, 24 Aug 2016 05:07:46 UTCA definition of the set of prime numbers without reference to the natural numbers?
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/5fhfibtZ9p4/JO-VASCoCQAJ
Can we list the essential properties of the set of prime numbers without any reference to the natural numbers, properties from which we might formally derive all of modern number theory as we know it? IIUC Jim Burns claims it is possible, but has yet to present them here. How about it Jim?https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/5fhfibtZ9p4
Dan ChristensenWed, 24 Aug 2016 03:32:25 UTCDespite all the attempts to libel and denigrate my work, the New Calculus flourishes: more subscribers, more views and likes.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/_9VLGB-duU4/-DsfsDaiCQAJ
Well-formed knowledge always defeats ignorance. Find out more here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClBbBVLs3M-d3dNgU4Vop_A Now 81 subscribers and over 16000 in less than 9 months.https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/_9VLGB-duU4
John GabrielWed, 24 Aug 2016 01:44:06 UTCPlease, for the love of "God", [quasi] fill in the blanks.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/ul4hDwdlsr8/Cf45CB6iCQAJ
Assume, (1.) a^p + b^p + c^p = 0 a, b, and c are non-zero pairwise co-prime. p is an odd prime. (2.a) (a+b) | (a^p + b^p = -c^p). (2.b) (a+c) | (a^p + c^p = -b^p). (2.c) (b+c) | (b^p + c^p = -a^p). From (2.a), (2.b), and (2.c) (3.) (a+b)(a+c)(b+c) | (abc)^p (4.) Y = (b+a)(b+c)(a+c)https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/ul4hDwdlsr8
Simon RobertsWed, 24 Aug 2016 01:42:20 UTCUnfair to attack me.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/lwYrBIDG6uE/xdp9Ot-bCQAJ
If any of you had to deal with an infinitude of morons in mainstream academia, as I have over many decades, perhaps you might realise why I have no patience and ZERO tolerance for dishonest and stupid academics. Watch how I am libeled by idiots who know shit about mathematics: https://www.youthttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/lwYrBIDG6uE
John GabrielTue, 23 Aug 2016 23:47:53 UTCProof of Fermat's Last Theorem.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/CXPLvprzVjo/MUphRsyXCQAJ
Version (2016.08.23:18:31) August, 23, 2016 approx: 6:30 pm (New York) Fermat's Last Theorem (proof by contradiction) -------------------------------------------------- Assume, (1.) a^p + b^p + c^p = 0, (1.a) a, b, and c are non-zero, pairwise co-prime. (1.b) p is an odd prime.https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/CXPLvprzVjo
Simon RobertsTue, 23 Aug 2016 22:33:13 UTCMathematics and the long illusion
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/k6MDC-8CQ2A/I1vcb1l5CQAJ
What is the true story behind most of the mathematical science being based on obvious fallacies and common illusions, started by accepting (Pi) and inventing cube root of (2) as real existing numbers on the real number line (with rigorous proof of impossibility of any locations on the real linehttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/k6MDC-8CQ2A
bassam king karzeddinTue, 23 Aug 2016 13:15:15 UTC3 4 5 right triangles in An Introduction to the history of mathematics?
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/oYX4GZtvXgU/KVqzvfxuCQAJ
I have An introduction to the History of Mathematics, by Howard Eves 1952 revised edition. Amazon says there is now a 1990 6th Edition so my problem may have been corrected. On page 50: "2.12 The 3, 4, 5 Right triangle There are reports that the ancient Egyptian surveyors laidhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/oYX4GZtvXgU
Paul ElliottTue, 23 Aug 2016 10:05:22 UTCEinstein's Twin Paradox: Absurdity Over Absurdity
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/qlcDloBWs18/YT44oZlsCQAJ
http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~djmorin/chap11.pdf David Morin, Introduction to Classical Mechanics With Problems and Solutions, Chapter 11, p. 14: "Twin A stays on the earth, while twin B flies quickly to a distant star and back. [...] For the entire outward and return parts of the trip, Bhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/qlcDloBWs18
Pentcho ValevTue, 23 Aug 2016 09:21:37 UTCGod exists and there is only one God.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/MzFIW6jyjmE/wHaaR0FeCQAJ
Conjecture: God exists and there is only one God.https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/MzFIW6jyjmE
Simon RobertsTue, 23 Aug 2016 04:58:44 UTCHow to handle the front page hog Simon Roberts
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/j7mAycPwkxY/Ccr8uQhcCQAJ
Sci.math was pretty quiet for 1/2 year until last several weeks with a front page hog emerging in a fake name Simon Roberts. He had been here before with a different fake name. His game is not math. So, like sci.physics, what you want to do is spend 2 minutes each day and clean out sci.mathhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/j7mAycPwkxY
Archimedes PlutoniumTue, 23 Aug 2016 04:18:01 UTCf(s) = g(c - s) is never true for all complex s.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/Xsq5Efk_Bx4/aSTYL-xaCQAJ
f(s) = g(c - s). s is a complex variable over all complex values. c is a complex non-zero constant. f and g are functions of one complex variable. Conjecture: The following is never true for all s, f(s) = g(c - s). Simon C. Roberts rete...@gmail.comhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/Xsq5Efk_Bx4
Simon RobertsTue, 23 Aug 2016 03:57:40 UTCf(x) = g(c - x) has no general solution.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/775OoaC6CnA/REnqzbhaCQAJ
f(x) = g(c - x). x is a variable over all reals. c is a real non-zero constant. f and g are functions of one real variable. Conjecture: The following is never true for all x, f(x) = g(c - x). Simon C. Roberts rete...@gmail.comhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/775OoaC6CnA
Simon RobertsTue, 23 Aug 2016 03:54:00 UTC[1 + 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/4 + ...] / [1/2 + 1/3 + 1/4 + 1/5 + ...] = Product of all primes, p.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/LdfQWC_NbVU/J3uXtL5VCQAJ
E(s) = Sum_{1 to oo}[1 + 1/2^s + 1/3^s + 1/4^s + ....] s is a complex variable --------------------------------------------------------------------- Euler showed: E(s) = PRODUCT_p[1/( 1 - p^(-s))]. (product over all primes) --------------------------------------------------------------------https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/LdfQWC_NbVU
Simon RobertsTue, 23 Aug 2016 02:22:48 UTCEuler "Zeta" function and one implication.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/epEftsdWgCI/h67f19BTCQAJ
Euler Zeta Function defined as E(s) = Sum_{1 to oo}[1 + 1/2^s + 1/3^s + 1/4^s + ....] s is a complex variable --------------------------------------------------------------------- Euler showed E(s) = PRODUCT_p[1/( 1 - p^(-s))] (product over all primes) E(s) = PRODUCT_p[p^s/( p^s - 1))]https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/epEftsdWgCI
Simon RobertsTue, 23 Aug 2016 01:47:26 UTCHelp ! Attractors Strange ?
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/rhYKXlVqPnc/bLyDU4RGCQAJ
I've developed software that generates colorful attractors in 2 dimensions. Most are indeed strange and often beautiful, BUT do they qualify as strange attractors ? Need help and guidance on determining the character of these attractors. Anyone ?https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/rhYKXlVqPnc
SteveGGMon, 22 Aug 2016 21:43:44 UTCRe: Peano Structures
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/aSCoBg3UCoY/oPCeuFA6CQAJ
> > With PA (Peano's Axioms) + set theory + logic it seems you can derive all of modern number theory and analysis as we know it. > >> The latter includes and goes far beyond the former. Try >> formalizing, say, theories of measure and integration using just PA. > > I understand that it ishttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/aSCoBg3UCoY
Peter PercivalMon, 22 Aug 2016 18:00:07 UTCHAVE A BRILLIANT JSH DAY !!
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/Wvcl2IaKmb4/G-i-7MQ1CQAJ
[brought to you by JSHRePostingService @wtf.ru?] Wednesday, February 01, 2006 JSH: Brilliance is as brilliance does I'm going to make a crucial point here, which goes to your innate brilliance and potential as a mathematician. If I am right, and it turns out there is this remarkable flawhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/Wvcl2IaKmb4
SergioMon, 22 Aug 2016 16:36:50 UTCFermat's Last Theorem (repost)
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/23NOzlGPv5M/OQEOfzA1CQAJ
https://www.dropbox.com/s/u5zhco1zhzqcamd/fermat%27s%20LT.pdf?dl=0 -Simon Roberts rete...@gmail.comhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/23NOzlGPv5M
Simon RobertsMon, 22 Aug 2016 16:26:12 UTCJSH Harristontelian Logic Day !
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/HFeA_6BiwCA/HQWVnZYyCQAJ
[By: JSHRePostingService-- dip into the past, to discover a truly honest troll who did not know math much either] http://hismath.blogspot.com/ Sunday, December 08, 2002 JSH: Newsgroup survey Given the amount of attention given to my work on the newsgroup, how did you explain tohttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/HFeA_6BiwCA
SergioMon, 22 Aug 2016 15:38:32 UTCDiophantine equation : x^{2n} + y^{2m} = z^2
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/09CVV8u5X00/FRu4W-suCQAJ
Conjecture: If (x, y, z) are nonzero co prime integers, and (n, m) are positive integers > 1, then this Diophantine equation : x^{2n} + y^{2m} = z^2 Doesn't have any integer solutionhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/09CVV8u5X00
bassam king karzeddinMon, 22 Aug 2016 14:31:18 UTCFacebook user, Google user, Skype user, Spotify user, Chrome user, Toyota driver, Walmart Shopper, Dealership user, ya know,..., whatever works.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/vrtv2lugSbs/xFdvsrsWCQAJ
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100010537686907 I'm not sure if it (link) is password protected.https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/vrtv2lugSbs
Simon RobertsMon, 22 Aug 2016 07:08:05 UTCTrying to make sense of Newton's bogus calculus whilst only 14 years old.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/oizrai13Bw4/amt7TuMGCQAJ
All is explained here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-mOEooW03iLdmxuakhSN1FEeTA/viewhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/oizrai13Bw4
John GabrielMon, 22 Aug 2016 02:17:43 UTCI am real. I post under my real name. Most of the filthy cowards on this site uses aliases or pseudonyms.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/pfx6vw1sK-0/5i5RzQkGCQAJ
These sites are mine: http://johngabrie1.wix.com/newcalculus https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClBbBVLs3M-d3dNgU4Vop_A https://sites.google.com/site/thenewcalculus/https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/pfx6vw1sK-0
John GabrielMon, 22 Aug 2016 02:02:09 UTCThe problem with trying to define rational numbers using set theory.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/doJLTXFuMOI/GXI5gz71CAAJ
The first major stumbling block is that in order to define rational numbers using set theory, we already need to know how to "count". Did you get that? That's right, you need to be able to compute the cardinality of a given set. Unless you are one of Cantor's delusional followers, cardinal valuehttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/doJLTXFuMOI
John GabrielSun, 21 Aug 2016 20:54:24 UTCHow we got number - a TRUE story.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/AxPY1n59CxQ/BD390WPsCAAJ
Although I am no longer a member of LinkedIn, some of my articles appear to have survived even after I terminated my account. Here is one in which I explain the perfect derivation of number that is independent of the human mind or any other mind. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-we-got-numberhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/AxPY1n59CxQ
John GabrielSun, 21 Aug 2016 18:12:08 UTCHELL-LOW!
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/aw17z4x6zM8/33FSKonmCAAJ
https://www.dropbox.com/s/8d3wpwm4c13nefr/DONE%20GONE%20DIED%20HE%20DID.jpg?dl=0 fuck you!, you know who you are. -Simonhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/aw17z4x6zM8
Simon RobertsSun, 21 Aug 2016 16:24:52 UTCHey, bitches!
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/qOK0LBlLX40/AmeWZDrmCAAJ
Chicago. "25 Or 6 To 4" Waiting for the break of day Searching for something to say Flashing lights against the sky Giving up I close my eyes Sitting cross-legged on the floor 25 or 6 to 4 Staring blindly into space Getting up to splash my face Wanting just to stay awake Wondering howhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/qOK0LBlLX40
Simon RobertsSun, 21 Aug 2016 16:19:13 UTCp is and odd prime: S_3 = {1,2,3,...,(p-1)/2}
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/GDN2QJODfxI/endva1vbCAAJ
Let p be an odd prime. CONJECTURE: For any u in S_1 = {1,2,3,...,(p-1)} u^2 (mod p) form the set S_2 with exactly (p-1)/2 members. S_2 is a subset of S_1. Also, if all members d^2 (mod p) > (p-1)/2 are transformed into new members, f : f = (p - d^2(mod p)) =< (p-1)/2 and if every f Uhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/GDN2QJODfxI
Simon RobertsSun, 21 Aug 2016 13:00:01 UTCshort proof: p_i = 1 (mod q)
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/S32SLr4FouM/udUgm-fJCAAJ
short proof: p_i = 1 (mod q) of a^q + b^q = (a +b)*[Product_i (p_i)] where, GCD(a,b) = 1, q is an odd prime (a+b)=/= 0 (mod q). ------------------- a^q + b^q - (a + b) = qX_0 [(a^p + b^p)/(a + b)] = qX_1 + 1 = [Product_i (p_i)] (by Fermat's Little Theorem) w.o.l.o.g. (that is:https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/S32SLr4FouM
Simon RobertsSun, 21 Aug 2016 07:40:11 UTCx^(2^p)=x^2 (mod p) where p is prime?
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/np6Ne_SpkDg/3d4MdPbFCAAJ
x^(2^p)=x^2 (mod p) where p is prime? I can see this being true if 2^p = 2 mod (p-1). -Simon Roberts rete...@gmail.comhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/np6Ne_SpkDg
Simon RobertsSun, 21 Aug 2016 06:27:57 UTCp divides [ (s_1)(s_2) + (s_1)(s_3) + (s_2)(s_3) ]
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/YSFuFlvJMgA/bbVdZKHFCAAJ
p divides [(s_1)(s_2) + (s_1)(s_3) + (s_2)(s_3)] p is an odd prime. integers: 0 < s_1 < p 0 < s_2 < p 0 < s_3 < p What, if any, are the relations (properties) of s_1, s_2, s_3 ? Simon Roberts rete...@gmail.comhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/YSFuFlvJMgA
Simon RobertsSun, 21 Aug 2016 06:21:52 UTCf(t) = g(c-t)f(c-t) and the Riemann Zeta function.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/FSDgVycDDac/-9mOU0vFCAAJ
Which pairs of functions, f and g, satisfy the equation, f(t) = g(c - t)f(c - t) where t is a complex variable and c = 1? Does f(s) = 1 + 1/2^s + 1/3^s + 1/4^s + ... where satisfy the equation, t = s = x + iy, and i =sqrt(-1). If so, does f(s) have any zero's and if so where? ---------https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/FSDgVycDDac
Simon RobertsSun, 21 Aug 2016 06:15:42 UTC{1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,...}
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/-wsWVUV5Vkc/08uXheDACAAJ
INDUCTIVE PROOF (read on to see amazing results) 1.) 1 is a member of {1} AND {1} has one member 2.) 2 is a member of {1,2} AND {1,2} has two members ASSUME, m.) m is a member of {1,2,...,m} AND {1,2,...,m} has m members Is This True For m+1? (BTW, I find "m" more pleasing than "n")https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/-wsWVUV5Vkc
Simon RobertsSun, 21 Aug 2016 04:54:46 UTCRe: Peano Structures
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/KR8JNfCkvZg/w_3NrUayCAAJ
consequence of those little 5 axioms -- in the context of formal proofs anyway. >> >> You need those axioms along with set theory and logic. > > As I have said repeatedly. Yes, so? >> Of course, once >> you have set theory and logic you don't need those axioms anymore. > You do need themhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/KR8JNfCkvZg
Martin ShobeSun, 21 Aug 2016 00:27:11 UTCNew Subject, New Topic
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/sQvwkyEXCSU/1bxCdVurCAAJ
The set of cauchy sequences C_S \subset { (a_n) ; n \in N } = N^R New relation R (a_n) R (b_n) <=> lim a_n = lim b_n // limits at \infty Prove that R is an equivalence relation. reflexive (a_n) R (a_n) symmetric (a_n) R (b_n) ==> (b_n) R (a_n) transitive (a_n) R (b_n) R (c_n) ==>https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/sQvwkyEXCSU
Vinicius Claudino FerrazSat, 20 Aug 2016 22:20:24 UTCRe: Peano Structures
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/mW2_2q2cByo/dsxFHf-ICAAJ
Dan Christensen wrote: > How would you define the prime numbers (a subset of N) without first defining N? You don't define N yourself. In your statement of Peano's axioms, N is a primitive symbol. -- I have had a tremor of bliss, a wink of heaven, a whisper, And I would no longer behttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/mW2_2q2cByo
Peter PercivalSat, 20 Aug 2016 11:50:44 UTCLooking for someone good at figuring out sequence formulas: 0.51, 105.7, 135, 139.6, 493.7, 497.7, 548.8
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/fvZfQSYq9pY/dXOWkFR8CAAJ
Asking for a mathematician good at figuring out the formula of a sequence of numbers. What do I mean? I mean, say, given 1, 4, 9, 16, we can easily see the formula is N^2. Two Sequences I want a formula for: 1st Sequence 0.51, 105.7, 135, 139.6, 493.7, 497.7, 548.8 2nd Sequence 938.3,https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/fvZfQSYq9pY
Archimedes PlutoniumSat, 20 Aug 2016 07:58:38 UTC----- ----- ----- property of a triangle
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/u8UXU-qgrvw/moWS4L9jCAAJ
Let ABC be an acute angled triangle such that all of a, b, c are integers and c > a > b > 1. Conjecture: All of sinA, sinB and sinC can not be rational. Any helpful comment and relevant reference will be appreciated.https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/u8UXU-qgrvw
DeepSat, 20 Aug 2016 00:28:11 UTCPAGE39, 4-1, WHAT NUMBERS EXIST/ Correcting Math textbook 5th ed
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/7mkA9eTK3x8/puAoJz5bCAAJ
PAGE39, 4-1, WHAT NUMBERS EXIST/ Correcting Math textbook 5th ed What Numbers exist when Infinity is well-defined What Numbers exist in mathematics-- Counting, Rational, Irrational, NewReal, and no others exist. Part 1 : What Numbers exist when infinity is well defined; Counting Numbers &https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/7mkA9eTK3x8
Archimedes PlutoniumFri, 19 Aug 2016 21:52:17 UTCRe: Peano Structures
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/cP4tz4fIoF0/szj281JZCAAJ
Am Freitag, 19. August 2016 20:52:35 UTC+2 schrieb Dan Christensen: > > > How would you define the prime numbers (a subset of N) without first defining N? > > > > > Very easy, just like you define the natural numbers, a subset of the rationals Q, without first defining Q. > > > > If it ishttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/cP4tz4fIoF0
WMFri, 19 Aug 2016 21:17:07 UTCRe: Peano Structures
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/lQCODdXa1b0/yf4dC6BWCAAJ
Dan Christensen wrote: > How would you define the prime numbers (a subset of N) without first defining N? There is a polynomial of degree 4 in 58 variable whose positive values are all and only the prime numbers. Jones, James P., 'Universal diophantine equation', /Journal of Symbolic Logic/,https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/lQCODdXa1b0
Peter PercivalFri, 19 Aug 2016 20:27:40 UTCRe: Peano Structures
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/6VLB6-S6Tyk/GQZjaLpVCAAJ
Dan Christensen wrote: > How would you define the prime numbers (a subset of N) without first defining N? Let p in R, a commutative ring with unity, be such that if p|xy for some x, y in R then p|x or p|y. Then p is a prime. -- I have had a tremor of bliss, a wink of heaven, a whisper,https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/6VLB6-S6Tyk
Peter PercivalFri, 19 Aug 2016 20:11:13 UTCRe: Peano Structures
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/SbKJYZIMx48/KJLQtuxSCAAJ
In article <c9ac732c-a3c1-4c95-a0b3-c10dd2eb85ee@googlegroups.com>, WM <wolfgang.m...@hs-augsburg.de> wrote: > Am Freitag, 19. August 2016 19:39:07 UTC+2 schrieb Dan Christensen: > > On Friday, August 19, 2016 at 1:10:22 PM UTC-4, WM wrote: > > > Am Freitag, 19. August 2016 18:22:36 UTC+2https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/SbKJYZIMx48
VirgilFri, 19 Aug 2016 19:19:51 UTCRe: Peano Structures
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/L4y_ZFDOfoY/pgiwsfVRCAAJ
In article <cb415681-5c14-4522-96c9-77c710dfade6@googlegroups.com>, WM <wolfgang.m...@hs-augsburg.de> wrote: > Am Freitag, 19. August 2016 18:55:56 UTC+2 schrieb Dan Christensen: > > > > > The set of prime numbers P plus {1} is a proper subset of N. It should be > > > possible to constructhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/L4y_ZFDOfoY
VirgilFri, 19 Aug 2016 19:02:10 UTCRe: Peano Structures
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/2T3b4YgLnEk/2ruiNcBRCAAJ
In article <5bc73772-e28f-464e-ad14-186f42da9e87@googlegroups.com>, WM <wolfgang.m...@hs-augsburg.de> wrote: > Am Freitag, 19. August 2016 18:22:36 UTC+2 schrieb Dan Christensen: > > > > The set of prime numbers P plus {1} is a proper subset of N. It should be > > possible to construct ahttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/2T3b4YgLnEk
VirgilFri, 19 Aug 2016 18:58:20 UTCMATH FORUM back up and running, by NCTM
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/f5BBNvTaYOQ/jYQE0-cmCAAJ
Glad to see Math Forum back and running. My name now has 13,155 posts, starting 3/31/2008. I think NCTM is some Union of Math Teachers. I like a second forum in case Google is down. Welcome back!!!!!!!!!!!! APhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/f5BBNvTaYOQ
Archimedes PlutoniumFri, 19 Aug 2016 05:53:12 UTCFermat's Last Theorem
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.math/dJNhHfaHHpE/ky8nc3clCAAJ
Fermat's Last Theorem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermat's_Last_Theorem In number theory, Fermat's Last Theorem (sometimes called Fermat's conjecture, especially in older texts) states that no three positive integers a, b, and c satisfy the equation a^n + b^n = c^n for any integerhttps://groups.google.com/d/topic/sci.math/dJNhHfaHHpE
Punjabi MathemagicianFri, 19 Aug 2016 05:26:50 UTC