Rabbiter Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 P Versus NP Hodge Conjecture Poincare Conjecture Reimann Hypothesis Yang-Milis existence and mass gap Navier-Stokes existence and smoothness Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer conjecture (which i thought was already proved) so far the only 1 that was solved is Poincare Conjecture by Gregori Pearlman..... what are the chances of some genius mathematician or mathematicians solving the other ones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cuthber Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 The chances are 1 in 124.73 But I'm not using a conventional definition of genius. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabbiter Posted September 2, 2012 Author Share Posted September 2, 2012 The chances are 1 in 124.73 But I'm not using a conventional definition of genius. grigori pearlman did solve/prove the pointcare conjecture, which im sure alot of top mathematicians thought wasn't going to happen in a long time, so anything is possible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sws5000 Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 I CLAIM THAT I HAVE A FULL PROOF FOR RIEMANN HYPOTHESIS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mathematic Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 I CLAIM THAT I HAVE A FULL PROOF FOR RIEMANN HYPOTHESIS Submit it to a peer review math journal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypervalent_iodine Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 ! Moderator Note And stop hijacking other threads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
univeral theory Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 P Versus NP Hodge Conjecture Poincare Conjecture Reimann Hypothesis Yang-Milis existence and mass gap Navier-Stokes existence and smoothness Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer conjecture (which i thought was already proved) so far the only 1 that was solved is Poincare Conjecture by Gregori Pearlman..... what are the chances of some genius mathematician or mathematicians solving the other ones find the solution for the remainning six problems as solved here http://www.scienceforums.net/index.php?app=core&module=attach§ion=attach&attach_id=4364 -1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bignose Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 (edited) find the solution for the remainning six problems as solved here http://www.scienceforums.net/index.php?app=core&module=attach§ion=attach&attach_id=4364 Wow Eqn 1 is [math]\frac{\frac{s}{1}}{+.-(\sqrt{s})}=1[/math] and Eqn 2 is [math]\partial\left(\frac{\frac{s}{1}}{+.-(\sqrt{s})}\right)= 1 + or - 1[/math] I stopped reading after that. It literally looks like you just took some math symbols and tossed them together. Because it is otherwise meaningless. Specifically: why write s/1 in a fractional form? Isn't that just s? the numerator of equation 1 is jibberish. What are you adding to what with the + sign? the decimal point? the minus sign? In equation 2 What are you taking the partial derivative of? And with respect to what? What is that 'or' doing on the RHS of eqn 2? How does one know if it is +1 or -1? After these numerous mistakes, I just quit reading. I posted this simply in the hopes that no one else wastes their time or bandwidth downloading the .pdf file. Trust me, it is worth neither. Edited December 19, 2012 by Bignose 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 It's not adding anything, the number in the numerator is obviously +.- or - tens more than +. This is a constant such that, if multiplied by any number, it equals the square of that number. Thus that equation yields 1 as an answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cuthber Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 Congratulations! You have successfully translated a gibberish equation into gibberish words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 That was sort of the point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D H Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 In other words, you're trolling, and what's worse, you admit it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 I enjoy finding ways to make sense of nonsense, even if it doesn't ultimately mean anything. I sincerely apologize if that was inappropriate in this context. -1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 This is a constant such that, if multiplied by any number, it equals the square of that number. There is no such constant. cx=x2 Divide both sides by x c=x Look at that, your constant is a variable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypervalent_iodine Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 ! Moderator Note Back on topic, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now