tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.comments2021-01-20T16:53:40.445-05:00RecursivityUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger12210125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-34920333117669235902021-01-18T22:29:30.582-05:002021-01-18T22:29:30.582-05:00For minimal set of primes >b in base b, I only ...For minimal set of primes >b in base b, I only solved bases 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, other bases seems to be very hard, e.g. For base 7, the set is {14, 16, 23, 25, 32, 41, 43, 52, 56, 61, 65, 113, 115, 131, 133, 155, 212, 221, 304, 313, 335, 344, 346, 364, 445, 515, 533, 535, 544, 551, 553, 1022, 1051, 1112, 1202, 1211, 1222, 2111, 3031, 3055, 3334, 3503, 3505, 3545, 4504, 4555, 5011, 5455, 5545, 5554, 6034, 6634, 11111, 11201, 30011, 30101, 31001, 31111, 33001, 33311, 35555, 40054, 100121, 150001, 300053, 351101, 531101, 1100021, 33333301, 5100000001, ..., 33333333333333331, ...}, and for base 9, the set is {12, 14, 18, 21, 25, 32, 34, 41, 45, 47, 52, 58, 65, 67, 74, 78, 81, 87, 117, 131, 135, 151, 155, 175, 177, 238, 272, 308, 315, 331, 337, 355, 371, 375, 377, 438, 504, 515, 517, 531, 537, 557, 564, 601, 638, 661, 702, 711, 722, 735, 737, 751, 755, 757, 771, 805, 838, 1011, 1015, 1101, 1701, 2027, 2207, 3017, 3057, 3101, 3501, 3561, 3611, 3688, 3868, 5035, 5051, 5071, 5101, 5501, 5554, 5705, 5707, 7017, 7075, 7105, 7301, 8535, 8544, 8555, 8854, 20777, 22227, 22777, 30161, 33388, 50161, 50611, 53335, 55111, 55535, 55551, 57061, 57775, 70631, 71007, 77207, 100037, 100071, 100761, 105007, 270707, 301111, 305111, 333035, 333385, 333835, 338885, 350007, 500075, 530005, 555611, 631111, 720707, 2770007, 3030335, 7776662, 30300005, 30333335, 38333335, 51116111, 70000361, 300030005, 300033305, 351111111, 1300000007, 5161111111, 8333333335, ..., 300000000035, ..., 544444444444, ..., 2000000000007, ..., 5700000000001, …, 30000000000000000000051, …, 56111111111111111111111111111111111111, ..., 7666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666662, …, 30_{1158}11, ...}<br /><br />b number of minimal primes (start with b+1) base b base-b form of largest minimal prime (start with b+1) base b length of largest minimal prime (start with b+1) base b algebraic ((a×bn+c)/d) form of largest minimal prime (start with b+1) base b<br />2 1 11 2 3<br />3 3 111 3 13<br />4 5 221 3 41<br />5 22 10_{93}13 96 5^95+8<br />6 11 40041 5 5209<br />7 ≥71 ≥3_{16}1 ≥17 ≥(7^17−5)/2<br />8 75 4_{220}7 221 (4×8^221+17)/7<br />9 ≥142 ≥30_{1158}11 ≥1161 ≥3×9^1160+10<br />10 77 50_{28}27 31 5×10^30+27<br />11 ≥890 ≥5_{161}2A ≥163 ≥(11^163−57)/2<br />12 106 40_{39}77 42 4×12^41+91<br />13 ≥2451 ≥80_{32017}111 ≥32021 ≥8×13^32020+183<br />14 ≥594 ≥4D_{19698} ≥19699 ≥5×14^19698−1<br />15 ≥1146 ≥96_{104}08 ≥107 ≥(66×15^106−619)/7<br />16 ≥1873 ≥DB_{32234} ≥32235 ≥(206×16^32234−11)/15<br /><br />Base 11 is very hard, since for the family 57* (i.e. 5777...777), I searched through 25000 digits without found any primes or probable primes (the family 57* in base 11 does not ruled out as only contain composite numbers), see the pdf file https://mersenneforum.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=24177&d=1610562701Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09839534724966975771noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-83543299647980556632021-01-18T22:13:39.863-05:002021-01-18T22:13:39.863-05:00I found the minimal set of primes with >=2 digi...I found the minimal set of primes with >=2 digits, the set is {11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31, 37, 41, 43, 47, 53, 59, 61, 67, 71, 73, 79, 83, 89, 97, 227, 251, 257, 277, 281, 349, 409, 449, 499, 521, 557, 577, 587, 727, 757, 787, 821, 827, 857, 877, 881, 887, 991, 2087, 2221, 5051, 5081, 5501, 5581, 5801, 5851, 6469, 6949, 8501, 9001, 9049, 9221, 9551, 9649, 9851, 9949, 20021, 20201, 50207, 60649, 80051, 666649, 946669, 5200007, 22000001, 60000049, 66000049, 66600049, 80555551, 555555555551, 5000000000000000000000000000027}<br /><br />Also, I solved this set in bases 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12: (if the base is prime, the prime "10" (i.e. the prime equal to the base) is also excluded, i.e. my set is the minimal set of primes > base, rather than >= base)<br /><br />Base 2: {11}<br /><br />Base 3: {12, 21, 111}<br /><br />Base 4: {11, 13, 23, 31, 221}<br /><br />Base 5: {12, 21, 23, 32, 34, 43, 104, 111, 131, 133, 313, 401, 414, 3101, 10103, 14444, 30301, 33001, 33331, 44441, 300031, 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000013}<br /><br />Base 6: {11, 15, 21, 25, 31, 35, 45, 51, 4401, 4441, 40041}<br /><br />Base 8: {13, 15, 21, 23, 27, 35, 37, 45, 51, 53, 57, 65, 73, 75, 107, 111, 117, 141, 147, 161, 177, 225, 255, 301, 343, 361, 401, 407, 417, 431, 433, 463, 467, 471, 631, 643, 661, 667, 701, 711, 717, 747, 767, 3331, 3411, 4043, 4443, 4611, 5205, 6007, 6101, 6441, 6477, 6707, 6777, 7461, 7641, 47777, 60171, 60411, 60741, 444641, 500025, 505525, 3344441, 4444477, 5500525, 5550525, 55555025, 444444441, 744444441, 77774444441, 7777777777771, 555555555555525, 44444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444447}<br /><br />Base 10: {11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31, 37, 41, 43, 47, 53, 59, 61, 67, 71, 73, 79, 83, 89, 97, 227, 251, 257, 277, 281, 349, 409, 449, 499, 521, 557, 577, 587, 727, 757, 787, 821, 827, 857, 877, 881, 887, 991, 2087, 2221, 5051, 5081, 5501, 5581, 5801, 5851, 6469, 6949, 8501, 9001, 9049, 9221, 9551, 9649, 9851, 9949, 20021, 20201, 50207, 60649, 80051, 666649, 946669, 5200007, 22000001, 60000049, 66000049, 66600049, 80555551, 555555555551, 5000000000000000000000000000027}<br /><br />Base 12: {11, 15, 17, 1B, 25, 27, 31, 35, 37, 3B, 45, 4B, 51, 57, 5B, 61, 67, 6B, 75, 81, 85, 87, 8B, 91, 95, A7, AB, B5, B7, 221, 241, 2A1, 2B1, 2BB, 401, 421, 447, 471, 497, 565, 655, 665, 701, 70B, 721, 747, 771, 77B, 797, 7A1, 7BB, 907, 90B, 9BB, A41, B21, B2B, 2001, 200B, 202B, 222B, 229B, 292B, 299B, 4441, 4707, 4777, 6A05, 6AA5, 729B, 7441, 7B41, 929B, 9777, 992B, 9947, 997B, 9997, A0A1, A201, A605, A6A5, AA65, B001, B0B1, BB01, BB41, 600A5, 7999B, 9999B, AAAA1, B04A1, B0B9B, BAA01, BAAA1, BB09B, BBBB1, 44AAA1, A00065, BBBAA1, AAA0001, B00099B, AA000001, BBBBBB99B, B0000000000000000000000000009B, 400000000000000000000000000000000000000077}Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09839534724966975771noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-56271090505494313392021-01-18T22:13:17.597-05:002021-01-18T22:13:17.597-05:00I found the minimal set of primes with >=2 digi...I found the minimal set of primes with >=2 digits, the set is {11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31, 37, 41, 43, 47, 53, 59, 61, 67, 71, 73, 79, 83, 89, 97, 227, 251, 257, 277, 281, 349, 409, 449, 499, 521, 557, 577, 587, 727, 757, 787, 821, 827, 857, 877, 881, 887, 991, 2087, 2221, 5051, 5081, 5501, 5581, 5801, 5851, 6469, 6949, 8501, 9001, 9049, 9221, 9551, 9649, 9851, 9949, 20021, 20201, 50207, 60649, 80051, 666649, 946669, 5200007, 22000001, 60000049, 66000049, 66600049, 80555551, 555555555551, 5000000000000000000000000000027}<br /><br />Also, I solved this set in bases 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12: (if the base is prime, the prime "10" (i.e. the prime equal to the base) is also excluded, i.e. my set is the minimal set of primes > base, rather than >= base)<br /><br />Base 2: {11}<br /><br />Base 3: {12, 21, 111}<br /><br />Base 4: {11, 13, 23, 31, 221}<br /><br />Base 5: {12, 21, 23, 32, 34, 43, 104, 111, 131, 133, 313, 401, 414, 3101, 10103, 14444, 30301, 33001, 33331, 44441, 300031, 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000013}<br /><br />Base 6: {11, 15, 21, 25, 31, 35, 45, 51, 4401, 4441, 40041}<br /><br />Base 8: {13, 15, 21, 23, 27, 35, 37, 45, 51, 53, 57, 65, 73, 75, 107, 111, 117, 141, 147, 161, 177, 225, 255, 301, 343, 361, 401, 407, 417, 431, 433, 463, 467, 471, 631, 643, 661, 667, 701, 711, 717, 747, 767, 3331, 3411, 4043, 4443, 4611, 5205, 6007, 6101, 6441, 6477, 6707, 6777, 7461, 7641, 47777, 60171, 60411, 60741, 444641, 500025, 505525, 3344441, 4444477, 5500525, 5550525, 55555025, 444444441, 744444441, 77774444441, 7777777777771, 555555555555525, 44444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444447}<br /><br />Base 10: {11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31, 37, 41, 43, 47, 53, 59, 61, 67, 71, 73, 79, 83, 89, 97, 227, 251, 257, 277, 281, 349, 409, 449, 499, 521, 557, 577, 587, 727, 757, 787, 821, 827, 857, 877, 881, 887, 991, 2087, 2221, 5051, 5081, 5501, 5581, 5801, 5851, 6469, 6949, 8501, 9001, 9049, 9221, 9551, 9649, 9851, 9949, 20021, 20201, 50207, 60649, 80051, 666649, 946669, 5200007, 22000001, 60000049, 66000049, 66600049, 80555551, 555555555551, 5000000000000000000000000000027}<br /><br />Base 12: {11, 15, 17, 1B, 25, 27, 31, 35, 37, 3B, 45, 4B, 51, 57, 5B, 61, 67, 6B, 75, 81, 85, 87, 8B, 91, 95, A7, AB, B5, B7, 221, 241, 2A1, 2B1, 2BB, 401, 421, 447, 471, 497, 565, 655, 665, 701, 70B, 721, 747, 771, 77B, 797, 7A1, 7BB, 907, 90B, 9BB, A41, B21, B2B, 2001, 200B, 202B, 222B, 229B, 292B, 299B, 4441, 4707, 4777, 6A05, 6AA5, 729B, 7441, 7B41, 929B, 9777, 992B, 9947, 997B, 9997, A0A1, A201, A605, A6A5, AA65, B001, B0B1, BB01, BB41, 600A5, 7999B, 9999B, AAAA1, B04A1, B0B9B, BAA01, BAAA1, BB09B, BBBB1, 44AAA1, A00065, BBBAA1, AAA0001, B00099B, AA000001, BBBBBB99B, B0000000000000000000000000009B, 400000000000000000000000000000000000000077}Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09839534724966975771noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-83875993098599272282021-01-18T22:12:41.146-05:002021-01-18T22:12:41.146-05:00I found the minimal set of primes with >=2 digi...I found the minimal set of primes with >=2 digits, the set is {11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31, 37, 41, 43, 47, 53, 59, 61, 67, 71, 73, 79, 83, 89, 97, 227, 251, 257, 277, 281, 349, 409, 449, 499, 521, 557, 577, 587, 727, 757, 787, 821, 827, 857, 877, 881, 887, 991, 2087, 2221, 5051, 5081, 5501, 5581, 5801, 5851, 6469, 6949, 8501, 9001, 9049, 9221, 9551, 9649, 9851, 9949, 20021, 20201, 50207, 60649, 80051, 666649, 946669, 5200007, 22000001, 60000049, 66000049, 66600049, 80555551, 555555555551, 5000000000000000000000000000027}<br /><br />Also, I solved this set in bases 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12: (if the base is prime, the prime "10" (i.e. the prime equal to the base) is also excluded, i.e. my set is the minimal set of primes > base, rather than >= base)<br /><br />Base 2: {11}<br /><br />Base 3: {12, 21, 111}<br /><br />Base 4: {11, 13, 23, 31, 221}<br /><br />Base 5: {12, 21, 23, 32, 34, 43, 104, 111, 131, 133, 313, 401, 414, 3101, 10103, 14444, 30301, 33001, 33331, 44441, 300031, 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000013}<br /><br />Base 6: {11, 15, 21, 25, 31, 35, 45, 51, 4401, 4441, 40041}<br /><br />Base 8: {13, 15, 21, 23, 27, 35, 37, 45, 51, 53, 57, 65, 73, 75, 107, 111, 117, 141, 147, 161, 177, 225, 255, 301, 343, 361, 401, 407, 417, 431, 433, 463, 467, 471, 631, 643, 661, 667, 701, 711, 717, 747, 767, 3331, 3411, 4043, 4443, 4611, 5205, 6007, 6101, 6441, 6477, 6707, 6777, 7461, 7641, 47777, 60171, 60411, 60741, 444641, 500025, 505525, 3344441, 4444477, 5500525, 5550525, 55555025, 444444441, 744444441, 77774444441, 7777777777771, 555555555555525, 44444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444447}<br /><br />Base 10: {11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31, 37, 41, 43, 47, 53, 59, 61, 67, 71, 73, 79, 83, 89, 97, 227, 251, 257, 277, 281, 349, 409, 449, 499, 521, 557, 577, 587, 727, 757, 787, 821, 827, 857, 877, 881, 887, 991, 2087, 2221, 5051, 5081, 5501, 5581, 5801, 5851, 6469, 6949, 8501, 9001, 9049, 9221, 9551, 9649, 9851, 9949, 20021, 20201, 50207, 60649, 80051, 666649, 946669, 5200007, 22000001, 60000049, 66000049, 66600049, 80555551, 555555555551, 5000000000000000000000000000027}<br /><br />Base 12: {11, 15, 17, 1B, 25, 27, 31, 35, 37, 3B, 45, 4B, 51, 57, 5B, 61, 67, 6B, 75, 81, 85, 87, 8B, 91, 95, A7, AB, B5, B7, 221, 241, 2A1, 2B1, 2BB, 401, 421, 447, 471, 497, 565, 655, 665, 701, 70B, 721, 747, 771, 77B, 797, 7A1, 7BB, 907, 90B, 9BB, A41, B21, B2B, 2001, 200B, 202B, 222B, 229B, 292B, 299B, 4441, 4707, 4777, 6A05, 6AA5, 729B, 7441, 7B41, 929B, 9777, 992B, 9947, 997B, 9997, A0A1, A201, A605, A6A5, AA65, B001, B0B1, BB01, BB41, 600A5, 7999B, 9999B, AAAA1, B04A1, B0B9B, BAA01, BAAA1, BB09B, BBBB1, 44AAA1, A00065, BBBAA1, AAA0001, B00099B, AA000001, BBBBBB99B, B0000000000000000000000000009B, 400000000000000000000000000000000000000077}Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09839534724966975771noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-52782687596634900712021-01-04T00:02:34.855-05:002021-01-04T00:02:34.855-05:00You beat me to it.
Know that you have a cheerlea...You beat me to it. <br /><br />Know that you have a cheerleader. AIhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11751097984854813253noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-91944763718572965122020-12-12T20:13:02.068-05:002020-12-12T20:13:02.068-05:00So, his paper "Simplifying and Refactoring In...So, his paper "Simplifying and Refactoring Introductory Calculus" makes A LOT OF SENSE. <br /><br />https://arxiv.org/pdf/1811.03459.pdf<br /><br />The change that he makes to second derivative notation is almost obvious in hindsight. People can honestly disagree about what is "Easier to teach", but following this advice has completely cleared up things about Calculus that bothered me. <br /><br />And to be honest, other than his (apparently) insistence that higher derivative notation be fixed; it's not entirely original. JB happens to be a computer programmer as well. People that spend all their time on chalkboards and on paper or in LaTeX can work around bad notation. Computers can't really do this.<br /><br />This is because it's very possible to have correct answers for all the inputs that they get applied to, for hundreds of years; because by definition, you use tools where they work, and obey a rule to not uses it in the situations where the notation has broken down. <br /><br />In what he is doing, he has effectively discovered Auto-differentiation; which is the technique used for Deep Learning in Artificial Intelligence. I ran into Johnathan Bartlett's paper when I was trying to make sense of Auto-differentiation. In a DeepLearning model, you have the notion of taking a general program with thousands of inputs and differentiating it. You calculate f(x0,x1,x2,...) for a really huge function that could have hundreds of thousands of parameters; because you will use the first derivative of it to do backpropagation. In this situation if you DO NOT fix the damned notation, then in your CODE you have to fill it with exceptional cases to get the correct answer in spite of an issue with the notation. Welcome to the world of programming.<br /><br />I would say that if you try to implement multi-variable calculus in a raw programming language (ie: Python without libraries), that you will start to understand the perspective of Finitism to some degree. In code, when the (algebraic) pattern breaks; you really need to think hard about whether putting in special case code to handle things like "this value is really small/large" is going to eventually break a pattern that it needs to match.<br /><br />We are beginning to see a clash of worlds from computer graphics programmers ... who discover Geometric Algebra, when they start to regard all the bizzare workarounds in Gibbs Vector Algebra as bugs. <br /><br />Just because something works, doesn't mean that it's holy and unchallengeable. All day long, I deal with code that works perfectly over a wide range of requirements for many years; and a customer needs to apply it to a new context. In these cases, you realize that some inconveniences that you tolerated are actually design flaws; or even bugs when scope of it is expanded.<br /><br />The comments about "creationists can't do calculus" is idiotic by the way. Newton himself was a religious person that calculated the end of the world from the bible, dabbled in alchemy, and other kinds of crackpot pseudo-science. It's completely irrelevant to what he managed to get right. <br /><br />I haven't read anything else from Johnathan Bartlett, but his paper about higher derivative fixes is quite interesting. And his Calculus book actually is a really great book on the subject. The bits in it that are heretical are out of necessity. But almost all math books written by people who have actual experience writing large code bases, in computer graphics especially, have something in common: they understand the value of making things as algebraic as possible, so that the code does the right thing without a human being second-guessing it.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Rob Fieldinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17991209454728314236noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-26868930529969469692020-12-09T14:41:38.334-05:002020-12-09T14:41:38.334-05:00Dewdney's claims about cell phone calls were d...Dewdney's claims about cell phone calls were definitively debunked. For example, here: https://www.911facts.dk/?p=7551&lang=enJeffrey Shallithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12763971505497961430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-1308231350156712402020-11-21T18:19:54.811-05:002020-11-21T18:19:54.811-05:00My great grandfather was a fireman on SS Merion an...My great grandfather was a fireman on SS Merion and her sister ship. Only found this out of late.<br /><br />In his later life he suffered terribly with lung disease likely caused by his time at sea. Ryanssonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10645621917124609450noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-69027970322002001442020-10-12T21:36:00.558-04:002020-10-12T21:36:00.558-04:00The number of scenarios in the official explanatio...The number of scenarios in the official explanation that are not grounded in reality FAR outnumber Dewdney’s claims. FAR. <br /><br />Do you need a list?<br /><br />Can you explain why you think anything he says isn’t grounded in reality considering the technology to do so such as take over a Boeing 767/57 remotely existed at the time?Maircashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14254136033600627852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-21786261791700788502020-10-12T21:32:00.954-04:002020-10-12T21:32:00.954-04:00You know now that relying on the 9/11 report for i...You know now that relying on the 9/11 report for irrefutable facts is ridiculous, right?<br /><br />I mean this is from 2008 when you should’ve known that the 9/11 commission lied / omitted information about telephone calls. In fact, the FBI changed most of the calls that family members has Specifically said come from cell phones based on the caller ID when they received the call once they found out that sell phone calls could not be completed at the altitudes they claimed.<br /><br />The commission report says only 2 calls were from cell phones / surely you don’t actually still believe that’s true?<br />Maircashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14254136033600627852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-41920492227118790602020-10-04T11:41:14.650-04:002020-10-04T11:41:14.650-04:00Well only one example is possible, which is the nu...Well only one example is possible, which is the number specified by what I said:<br />0.100100001000000100....<br />It has a 1 in the first digit after the decimal point, in the 4th, in the 9th, etc. and 0's everywhere else.Jeffrey Shallithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12763971505497961430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-28781739463725911872020-10-02T11:30:32.020-04:002020-10-02T11:30:32.020-04:00can you explain what you mean by "consider th...can you explain what you mean by "consider the base-10 number defined by having a "1" in the i'th digit if i is a perfect square (like 1,4,9,16, etc.), and 0 otherwise", and give an example?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17274277069952461507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-55767125070843893122020-09-14T18:43:14.125-04:002020-09-14T18:43:14.125-04:00What with possible signs of life on Venus, and neu...What with possible signs of life on Venus, and neural networks winning Go championships, IDism is getting closer and closer to flat-Earth status (as irrelevant cultists). By the same token, they may never disappear completely.<br /><br />What bothers me most about their arguments is they seem to have no idea how actual human design or intelligence works. (There is no magic involved.) Their position compares one unknown mechanism with another, with no possible explanatory gain.JimVhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10198704789965278981noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-14753884749367935102020-09-10T23:20:13.986-04:002020-09-10T23:20:13.986-04:00Evolution is a theory and those researching it pro...Evolution is a theory and those researching it propose and test mechanism by which it works. ID is a theory but those proposing it refuse to propose and test mechanisms by which it works. I don’t think any more has to be said. William Spearshakehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09354659259971103985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-5515787402692579822020-09-10T13:00:26.765-04:002020-09-10T13:00:26.765-04:00But IDiots have something much better than calcula...But IDiots have something much better than calculations. They have intuition. Just ask Douglas Axe.<br /><br />https:// evolutionnews.org/ 2016/ 08/ putting_words_t/MNbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01427385535099104405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-70087821908921505292020-08-20T04:29:53.360-04:002020-08-20T04:29:53.360-04:00You're absolutely right, "death prose&quo...You're absolutely right, "death prose" is not a word!<br /><br />It's two words, and it's not what I said.<br />Jeffrey Shallithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12763971505497961430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-55011107866296810782020-08-19T18:56:25.117-04:002020-08-19T18:56:25.117-04:00I pity you. Stick to numbers and poorly attempting...I pity you. Stick to numbers and poorly attempting to create a valid argument. I know personally the people who persecuted that girl and they are communists and anti-Christians. I have so much proof that very soon I will be releasing proof that will demonstrate everything I claimed. I feel sorry for you that they are about to ban math because it is too hard for some groups. You could always get a job working at McDonalds! Good luck and you will soon read all about what I drop! P.S death prose is not a word so you might wand to finish grade two!hollysevenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12485554427040700371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-86390395170982784192020-08-19T18:27:39.812-04:002020-08-19T18:27:39.812-04:00Holly:
Is it too late for you to get a refund on ...Holly:<br /><br />Is it too late for you to get a refund on your tuition? Because, judging from your deathless prose, you haven't learned much after grade 7.<br /><br />I've worked at a Canadian university for 30 years, and oddly enough, I don't know a single "communist" here. I do know, however, a lot of Christian professors. There's even an endowed lecture series aimed at converting people to the Christian faith.Jeffrey Shallithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12763971505497961430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-29029080527736463152020-08-19T18:24:25.045-04:002020-08-19T18:24:25.045-04:00Alastair:
Your ravings are most intriguing. Have...Alastair:<br /><br />Your ravings are most intriguing. Have you considered comedy as a profession?Jeffrey Shallithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12763971505497961430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-74549448606426667302020-08-19T18:20:10.873-04:002020-08-19T18:20:10.873-04:00Your "proof" is wrong because no integer...Your "proof" is wrong because no integer corresponds to the product of infinitely many primes. It's a classic error of beginners.Jeffrey Shallithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12763971505497961430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-16826314406695471992020-08-17T11:43:22.506-04:002020-08-17T11:43:22.506-04:00Animals don't have language , hence they don&#...Animals don't have language , hence they don't know statistics. They've never read a statistics book. (For simplicity i define language as 'english' (specifically american english--not that cockney or hi scale english they speak in uk which is a bastardization of american, just as 'quebecois' and the haitian 'patois' is a bastardization of french. when america colonized and civilized uk and france and europe, somehow the american language didn't last in pure form. (don't believe the mainstream hisotry books---those are crackpot history--americans discovered EU, not the rerverse. )<br /><br />the cicadas (an insect) know the fibonnaci series, as do pine cones. the piraha 'indians' (or 'indigneous people) of the amazon don't use standard recursion for language and dont speak english. all these animals and non-american speakers know statistics and other math but not under that term ---hence they don't know statistics---they can't even spell it. <br /><br />some say you need language to have a mind. hence if you dont speak americanese you don't have a mind. most americans have developed a new universal language similar to UTP (universal theories of programming) --its called twitter. (see Nirvana and Jackson 5 mashup on youtube 'smells like rockin robin' ---tweet tweet. <br /><br />as an aside the paper 'halting still standing' paper is online with the entire UTP procededings under the author's research gate page. (has alot of papers). reminds me of 'standing rock' (keystone (cops) XL in ND. <br /><br />here's a proof that the integers are uncountable (others have found it). 'every integer can be written as a product of primes. the set of prime numbers P is countably infinite. so you can get every integer from some combination of primes. take the power set of primes <br />2^P . thats an uncountable set. each member maps to an integer. hence the integers are uncountable. <br /><br /> prove me wrong---have you ever counted all the integers? <br /><br />Edward Nelson of Princeotn U (into nnstandard analyses and 'stochastic dynamics' (a failed hidden variable theory of quantum mechanics) proved arithmatic was inconsistant just before he died, but then after that, just before he died, he retracted the proof. terrance tao of cal tech pointed out he had assumed an axiom of infinity to prove infinity didnt exist. <br /><br />also the post on the princeton lawyer / theologian r george who had a death sentence put on him for his 'anti-abortion stance' by a pro-abortion rights activist (who went to jail for making that threat) actually makes some unnecessary criticismn of the logic of the arguemnt. he's arguing from faith--who can argue with that. he's also the son of west virginia coal miners who somehow became a professor at princeteon. he may still be breathing out all that coal dust his father brought home. its called 'epigentics'.mediahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16362083339472635217noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-4551309026101514312020-08-16T10:21:41.246-04:002020-08-16T10:21:41.246-04:00I will now take issue with your reply to me in 201...I will now take issue with your reply to me in 2014, ……. <br />….. Sorry, but the equation x^n = z^2 - y^2 has nothing to do with Fermat's last theorem, and is of no interest (since every odd number or multiple of 4 is the difference of two squares). ........<br />because although I didn’t say so at the time trying to be respectful, it beggars belief that a so called university professor of mathematics could utter such a mathematically hypocritical remark!<br />The equation you dismiss so off handily like an ignoramus is none other than the ‘Quarter Squares Rule’, more properly referred to as Euclid’s ‘Elements’, book2 proposition 8, a theorem and indisputable TRUTH and PROOF. So Z & Y are simply n raised to 2 powers, say p & q so that n=p+q.<br />To show how stupid I consider you and your ‘Band of Brothers’ can be despite your superior intellect, it is a FACT easily demonstrated at least two ways, one of which I have just shown, that the number of differences of two squares for any x^(2n) or (2n+1) is n so the bigger the exponent the more DoS solutions exist. Hardly the scenario for a Fermat equation to co-exist. So why was it deemed necessary to have a proof that applied to every PRIME power above the second when a proof for powers 3 & 4 was all that was necessary?<br />Further more it is a well established fact, but obviously not to you and your half wit cronies, that the partial sums of the cubes sum to a triangular number squared so that the difference of two adjacent triangular numbers squared is the cube of the difference between the 2 numbers. We can then multiply repeatedly through the expression by the square of the difference to give the 5,7,9,11,13,15..... power of x all the way to infinity. AND YOU SAY IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE FERMAT EQUATION ! B*LL*CKS!<br />YouTube has been awash with videos for the past 6 months regarding a new method for obtaining the roots of quadratics due to Po-Shen Loh and excellent videos, particularly his, they are as well. However I have had to comment that despite over 2 million combined views nobody, as far as I know, has commented to the fact that his method is none other than the application of the ‘Quarter Squares Rule’. At last recognition for the theorem ‘that is of little use’, a comment by Hall & Stevens in their 1893 edition of Euclid’s ‘Elements’.<br />Whilst I’m on the topic of STUPIDITY what about ‘Fermat’s Sums of Two Squares Theorem’. EVERY PRIME of modularity 4n+1 we are able to check is the sum of two squares as are their composites which are the sum of two or more squares and likewise their powers. We can arrange the ‘Sums of Two Squares’ into orderly, logical sequences that cover every possible one of them just like the ‘Times Tables’ we learn at school. We know the quadratic equations that describe the sequences horizontally, perpendicular and diagonally and yet it seems that this is just not good enough for the mathmagicians who bless us with at least 50 supposed abstract proofs including Zagier’s ‘One Sentence Proof’; “ a proof for professional mathematicians” according to German Professor Grieg!<br />And now we have proof by computer alias ‘The Windmill Proof’ which is purported to be a graphical representation of the one sentence proof. For me, and I don’t doubt most other people, it is just meaningless, childish graphics.<br />If the outline of the windmill is taken and the 4 vanes connected to form a square, we have the diagram for the ‘Pythagoras Theorem’ as given by the algebraic identity (A-B)^2=A^2-2AB+B^2. The diagram applies to everyone of the 4n+1 integers. So what the hell does it prove?<br />In a nutshell Jeffrey anyone who even considers that there may be a 4n+1 prime that is not a sum of two squares is without doubt just plain stupid.<br />Well nice to have touched base with you again and there is no charge for the maths lesson.<br />Alastair Bateman alias ‘The Simpleton’.Alastair Batemanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14395447443056931757noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-23516353641812184012020-08-16T10:15:32.359-04:002020-08-16T10:15:32.359-04:00Hey Jeffry I’m back after 6 years to see how you’r...Hey Jeffry I’m back after 6 years to see how you’re going on.<br />Hey! What the hells this! The ONLY INTELLECTUAL COMMENTS on this blog NAMELY MINE which rules out you and your cronies, have been attributed to anonymous. ANONYMOUS!<br />Jeffrey, Jeffrey, Jeffrey I think that’s deceitful and IT STINKS but then I shouldn’t be surprised really because at the end of the day you’re a member of that intellectually superior brigade, ‘The Mathmagician’ whose arrogance means they will never admit they are wrong and that mere mortals could never possibly be right when it contradicts or undermines them in any way.<br />I find it hard to understand how so called professional mathematicians, some of whom are university professors have difficulty comprehending A+B=C. So if we multiply thro’ by A then B we end up with A^2B +AB^2 = ABC. This we will have to give a label, a homogenous triple composite say, to distinguish it from a heterogeneous composite triple where A+B is not equal to C. So far so good!<br />It is obvious to any normal person that this applies to exponent 1 and by numerical example to exponent 2 to give (A*2)(B^2)(C^2). Applied to the ‘Fermat equation’ we end up with (A^n)(B^n)(C^n). I would mention at this point that the ‘Fermat equation’ is true FOR ALL exponents when two of the base numbers are integer and the third is obtained as the nth root of their equality and would result in a homogeneous triple composite. Of course the only downside is that it would not be an all integer solution.<br />Further more the composite triple comes with 3 equalities that can be arranged to give 3 quadruples, 2 with all positive terms and one with one negative term. These are known not surprisingly as Fermat-Bateman quadruples. I would refer you to my numerous YouTube videos on the subject of cubic quadruples, They can be derived algebraically (proved) in numerous ways. The exponents of the quadruple can be given as all nth power terms or a mix of both nth power and square terms. So if a ‘Fermat triple existed it would, apart from its numerical input, be a clone of the Pythagorean triples. The F-B quadruples give rise to (A+B)^2=A^2+2AB+B^2. Recogonise it? What an absurdity in light of the binomial expansions of the powers of the integers which in themselves show how stupid the subsequent rubbishing of Fermat’s statement was by you.Alastair Batemanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14395447443056931757noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-56394203926894788382020-08-10T22:52:48.485-04:002020-08-10T22:52:48.485-04:00First of all your assumption regarding Christianit...First of all your assumption regarding Christianity being the dominant religion in Canada relays on it following that it is also dominant in the university. This is as you know a non sequitur argument. Canadian universities especially in the arts are dominated by communists both the teachers and the indoctrinated students. Communism as you know relies on being able to convince everyone that their communist masters are actually their ruling gods. Thus, there is no room for religion that will not subvert to any other Human master than God. So, no Christianity is not the dominant ideology on campuses. Additionally, I actually go to this university and know the extremely leftist radical professors that persecuted her and trust me just like any other communist oligarchy they will not allow any dissent or they will do everything in their power to cancel you. They do not even allow diverse intellectual opinions in the English department. In other words, they are a bunch of communist tyrants. Her case got dismissed because her evidence of discrimination was weak but it does not follow that it did not happen. Remember OJ Simpson. He killed two people and everyone knew it but the evidence against him was weak so he walked. These professors are masters in using grades as a weapon against students who they seek to cancel because it is an easy means to discriminate because it is hard to prove otherwise in Subjects such as English which are highly subjective. I hope you might take some time to look at the review of the tyrants in this department that collaborated to cancel this young lady. Visit rate my prof and you will see that they have some very bad reviews from students due to their tyrannical behavior. There are several women in the department that are in positions of power that act like Putin himself. They have ten year and think they are invincible because they have been there for so many years and have developed a buddy system to protect each other. As I mentioned I actually go there and am in that department and have had friends who have encountered the same fate and watched them lose their academic careers over nothing more than finding themselves a target of the rage of these extreme leftist professors.hollysevenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12485554427040700371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-78587671584484193752020-07-23T20:56:24.420-04:002020-07-23T20:56:24.420-04:00Oh, I love this parabola poem! I've used it fo...Oh, I love this parabola poem! I've used it for nearly 25 years teaching high school mathematics. It fits wonderfully in our unit on conic sections. Many of my students have told me they like it, too; even those students who say they don't usually like math or poetry. Thank you for sharing this poem on your website, along with some information about the author. I'll be sure to pass this along to my students, too. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03050957110716066508noreply@blogger.com