Years ago found it harder to just accept mathematical logic with my own discoveries as kept trying to give other humans benefit of the doubt. But now I know better.
So yeah, I explained the prime counts closeness to continuous functions by connecting a difference equation when constrained that counts primes with a partial differential equation. Of course integrating that partial differential is done without constraints so humanity knows why there is a lag.
And I found the direct way to calculate the modular inverse which is recursive. Can be multi-threaded and cuts size of the modulus by at least half with each recursion, when you algorithm smart.
But also I used a generalized factorization to find a way to get to every algebraic integer solution possible, and then showed there were numbers beyond.
THAT probably impacts nuclear theory, but that scares me too. And I could go on. I've improved upon areas where Gauss lead, and have introduced a true modular algebra which is the most powerful thing human mathematics has ever come across.
Yet so much accomplished and so little officially recognized but the impact is there. I think Riemann was a nice guy, and appreciate his geometry more than some scribbled notes, which I read once in the original German. But there was never any reason to try to deify him.
Math can be hard because it does not bend to human wishes. So many who thought they were brilliant, were not. So many who...but does it matter?
Not really. In time this story will just be one more in the grand human one. My attention reality is crushing to some extent but am adjusting. Years in the process and am learning how to handle the pressure of attention from a planet of people.
Am here in the age of the web. If you think that it could be any other way for me you have no faith in humanity, no faith in logic, and no faith in mathematics.
What YOU know? Well depends on who you are. And I guess it's always been that way.
___JSH