World's largest prime discovered!

[Duncan Richer]

In article <61f5c9$nr6$1...@netnews.upenn.edu>, sda...@red.seas.upenn.edu
(The Disco King) wrote:

> cze...@us.oracle.nospam wrote:
> : Another one who clearly doesn't understand
> : the Law of Large Numbers! What do they teach
> : kids in school these days? If the other factor
> : contains enough prime factors, they will cancel
> : out the 4, leaving a prime.
>
> This is just plain silly... any number, however large, that is prime
> ceases to be so if it is multiplied by any number divisible by 2.
>
> The REAL "Law of Large Numbers" is a treatise by French statistician
> Jacob Bernoulli, which stated in essence: In any chance event, when the
> event happens repeatedly, the statistics will tend to prove the
> probabilities.
>
> It is most probably the defining statement in the history of statistical
> analysis...
>
For the benefit of someone who is very probably still in single figures
when it comes to AFU postings, a brief explanation.
A statement that is clearly this false, which even someone in Junior High
would recognise as being false, qualifies as what we call a "troll".
Such a message is designed to elicit responses such as yours, protesting
at the obvious ignorance of the post only to be unaware that the ignorance
was 100% feigned.

In such a situation, wait and see who else jumps for the hook. It's quite fun
once you get used to it.

--
Duncan "sekrit Kabal my hairy butt" Richer
Duncan "two continents - two taglines" Richer

--
Duncan "Slakko" Richer -- Now the lost Warner Brother is Really Lost!
Queens' College, University of Cambridge -- PhD in Pure Mathematics
Note ^ that apostrophic position -- it took 3 queens for 1 college.
"Equipment malfunction. " "Well, whack it." -- Pinky & the Brain

[Paul Alan Sturm]

Mike McCarty (jmcc...@sun1307.spd.dsccc.com) wrote:
: In article <343956aa.25404327@newsvr>,
: Daniel Chenault <dan...@trinity.mensa.net> wrote:
: )A prime number, by definition, is a number that is evenly divisible
: )only by itself and one. The four in the equation above violates that
: )rule, since the derived number would then be devisible by a number
: )other than itself and one. It's not esoteric, it's not large number
: )theory, it's plain ol' arithmetic.
: I think you neglected to turn on your sarcasm detector. I believe the
: fellow had his tongue firmly inserted into his cheek.

No if he had his tongue firmly inserted into his cheek, he would've
thypted like thith.

Hope thath helpf
Have a nith day

--
Paul Thurm lorem ipthum dolor thiht ameht, conthecthethuer adipthithing \
eliht, thed
diam nonummy nibh euithmod thinthidunth uth laoreeth dolore magna aliquam \
erath
thurm(ATH)theeesth.oo-mn.ed-oo voluthpath. Uth withi enim ad minim, lorem \
ipthum dolor sih.