Riemann hypothesis - Proof | Bitcointalksearch.org

R2D221

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

Quote from: username18333 on February 05, 2015, 02:47:41 AM

Existential development could subdue “economics” (R2D221) and render it “nought.”

Even if you were right (which I don't think), that wouldn't happen over night and we would still need economics for many years to come. And as such, this proof still does nothing to explain supply and demand of other concepts of economics.

username18333

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Knowledge could but approximate existence.

Quote from: R2D221 on February 05, 2015, 02:41:01 AM

Quote from: username18333 on February 05, 2015, 02:31:51 AM

. . .

Hyperreality (whereof, possession is an element) is characteristic of a more primitive sentience.

I still don't get how this relates to economics at all.

Existential development could subdue “economics” (R2D221) and render it “nought.”

R2D221

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

Quote from: username18333 on February 05, 2015, 02:31:51 AM

Hyperreality (whereof, possession is an element) is characteristic of a more primitive sentience.

I still don't get how this relates to economics at all.

R2D221

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

Please don't change my question marks.

username18333

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Knowledge could but approximate existence.

Quote from: R2D221 on February 05, 2015, 02:13:20 AM

Quote from: username18333 on February 05, 2015, 01:51:19 AM

Quote from: R2D221 on February 05, 2015, 01:49:37 AM

Quote from: username18333 on February 05, 2015, 01:48:34 AM

. . .

If earthly humanity could reach the point of proving that hypothesis, it would transcend “supply and demand” (Possum577).

But, would it explain it?

Yes: “Monkey see, monkey do.”

What??

Hyperreality (whereof, possession is an element) is characteristic of a more primitive sentience.

R2D221

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

Quote from: username18333 on February 05, 2015, 01:51:19 AM

Yes: “Monkey see, monkey do.”

What??

R2D221

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

Quote from: username18333 on February 05, 2015, 01:51:19 AM

Would it want to‽

What?

username18333

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Knowledge could but approximate existence.

Quote from: R2D221 on February 05, 2015, 01:49:37 AM

Quote from: username18333 on February 05, 2015, 01:48:34 AM

Quote from: Possum577 on February 05, 2015, 01:45:34 AM

How does this mathematical theory serve as a predictor for the human action of supply and demand, which directly impacts the price?

If earthly humanity could reach the point of proving that hypothesis, it would transcend “supply and demand” (Possum577).

But, would it explain it?

Yes: “Monkey see, monkey do.”

R2D221

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

Quote from: username18333 on February 05, 2015, 01:48:34 AM

Quote from: Possum577 on February 05, 2015, 01:45:34 AM

How does this mathematical theory serve as a predictor for the human action of supply and demand, which directly impacts the price?

If earthly humanity could reach the point of proving that hypothesis, it would transcend “supply and demand” (Possum577).

But, would it explain it?

username18333

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Knowledge could but approximate existence.

Quote from: Possum577 on February 05, 2015, 01:45:34 AM

How does this mathematical theory serve as a predictor for the human action of supply and demand, which directly impacts the price?

If earthly humanity could reach the point of proving that hypothesis, it would transcend “supply and demand” (Possum577).

Possum577

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

Loose lips sink sigs!

How does this mathematical theory serve as a predictor for the human action of supply and demand, which directly impacts the price?

Possum577

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

Loose lips sink sigs!

IF the OP doesn't have time to summarize the articles and share his opinion on them then I don't think we have the time to do the same.

username18333

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Knowledge could but approximate existence.

Quote from: coric on February 04, 2015, 03:51:31 AM

Quote from: username18333 on February 03, 2015, 10:11:33 PM

Code:

( ∀𝑥 𝑥 ∈ (0⁺, *0⁻) )  ⇒  [( 0 ± 𝑥 = {0⁻ − 𝑥, 0⁺ + 𝑥} = {−𝑥, 𝑥} ) ∧ ( *0 ± 𝑥 = {*0⁺ + 𝑥, *0⁻ − 𝑥} = {−*𝑥, *𝑥} )]

It is not “an infinity point” (coric), for such a point would not accomodate conventional mathematics’ “hyperreal numbers.” Instead, it is an origin—one that has been missed sorely.

The "point" is the one which you add to the complex plane to make the sphere ^C (can't post correct symbol on my phone). Guess after whom it is named Wink

And hyperteal numbers? The Riemann zeta function is defined on the complex plane! You can't even formulaze the hypothesis in some set where you add some funny infinitesimals to the real numbers in order to make 1/x somehow more pleasing. In complex analysis that's already as simple as it can get.

Code:

( ∀𝑥 𝑥 ∈ (0⁺, *0⁻) )  ⇒  ( 𝜉(*0 ± 𝑥) = ½[½ + 𝑖(*0 ± 𝑥)]([½ + 𝑖(*0 ± 𝑥)] − 1)𝜋^(−[½ + 𝑖(*0 ± 𝑥)] ÷ 2)Γ([½ + 𝑖(*0 ± 𝑥)] ÷ 2)𝜁(½ + 𝑖(*0 ± 𝑥)) ≟ 0 )

You were saying?

R2D221

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

The Riemann hypothesis has nothing to do with Bitcoin, at all.

This should go in Off-Topic.

coric

member

Activity: 169

Merit: 10

ExToke - Fee Free Trading

Quote from: username18333 on February 03, 2015, 10:11:33 PM

Code:

( ∀𝑥 𝑥 ∈ (−0, 0) )  ⇒  ( −0 ± 𝑥 = {−𝑥, 𝑥} ) ∧ ( 0 ± 𝑥 = {0⁻ + 𝑥, 0⁺ − 𝑥} )

It is not “an infinity point” (coric), for such a point would not accomodate conventional mathematics’ “hyperreal numbers.” Instead, it is an origin—one that has been missed sorely.

The "point" is the one which you add to the complex plane to make the sphere ^C (can't post correct symbol on my phone). Guess after whom it is named Wink

And hyperteal numbers? The Riemann zeta function is defined on the complex plane! You can't even formulaze the hypothesis in some set where you add some funny infinitesimals to the real numbers in order to make 1/x somehow more pleasing. In complex analysis that's already as simple as it can get.

username18333

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Knowledge could but approximate existence.

Quote from: coric on February 03, 2015, 07:37:04 AM

So, you're trying to reinvent limits? Nice, but you're some centuries late in that.

Yes, the singularity of 1/x can be "removed", even on the complex plane if you add an infinity point to make it a sphere, it becomes a simple reflection
Now Riemann's function is a wee bit more difficult Wink

Code:

( ∀𝑥 𝑥 ∈ (0⁺, *0⁻) )  ⇒  [( 0 ± 𝑥 = {0⁻ − 𝑥, 0⁺ + 𝑥} = {−𝑥, 𝑥} ) ∧ ( *0 ± 𝑥 = {*0⁺ + 𝑥, *0⁻ − 𝑥} = {−*𝑥, *𝑥} )]

It is not “an infinity point” (coric), for such a point would not accomodate conventional mathematics’ “hyperreal numbers.” Instead, it is an origin—one that has been missed sorely.

coric

member

Activity: 169

Merit: 10

ExToke - Fee Free Trading

And if you had a proof, you'd be at least a million dollar richer. Why are you posting that here?

coric

member

Activity: 169

Merit: 10

ExToke - Fee Free Trading

So, you're trying to reinvent limits? Nice, but you're some centuries late in that.

Yes, the singularity of 1/x can be "removed", even on the complex plane if you add an infinity point to make it a sphere, it becomes a simple reflection
Now Riemann's function is a wee bit more difficult Wink

Reynaldo

legendary

Activity: 1143

Merit: 1000

Quote from: iamback on January 05, 2015, 08:43:14 PM

I don't have time to study this in detail, and it seems to be off topic of Economics and perhaps belongs in the Technical discussion thread.

But if there is breakthrough on the dimensionality of primes, this could potentially have major implications on cracking public-key cryptography.

Please define dimensionality of primes.

if people actually found a formula to determine every prime then we couldnt use them for cryptography since it would be easy to determine any given primer number on the sequence and then it would break most of the cryptography that relies on the factorization problem, it was proven by Euclid that there are infinte prime numbers.

https://primes.utm.edu/notes/proofs/infinite/euclids.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integer_factorization

cynicSOB

member

Activity: 106

Merit: 10

yes, sometimes I'm a cynical SOB

Quote from: bitcoin_purist on January 06, 2015, 05:49:16 AM

I don't understand sh*t of what you just said, but it looks important

it's not... full of baloney

cr1776

legendary

Activity: 4130

Merit: 1307

Quote from: username18333 on January 05, 2015, 10:49:25 PM

The problem here is that conventional mathematics uses a flawed (i.e., partially anti-symmetric [i.e., one divided by infinity is equal to zero and one divided by zero is undefined]) numerical system. The Riemann hypothesis should be provable when using Earth’s numerical system with the system’s zero approached from the positive direction (which is of greater magnitude than its positive infinity) in the place of the traditional infinity of the conventional Riemann zeta function.

Quote from: Earth’s set of all real numbers

Code:

ℝ = {0⁻, −∞, …, −1, …, −⅟∞, −0⁻, −0⁺, ⅟∞, …, 1, …, ∞, 0⁺}

Why is the link through Tor?

bitcoin_purist

member

Activity: 75

Merit: 10

Fearless, except for those who are fearless

Quote from: username18333 on January 05, 2015, 10:49:25 PM

The problem here is that conventional mathematics uses a flawed (i.e., partially anti-symmetric [i.e., one divided by infinity is equal to zero and one divided by zero is undefined]) numerical system. The Riemann hypothesis should be provable when using Earth’s numerical system with the system’s zero approached from the positive direction (which is of greater magnitude than its positive infinity) in the place of the traditional infinity of the conventional Riemann zeta function.

Quote from: Earth’s set of all real numbers

Code:

ℝ = {0⁻, −∞, …, −1, …, −⅟∞, −0⁻, −0⁺, ⅟∞, …, 1, …, ∞, 0⁺}

I don't understand sh*t of what you just said, but it looks important

However, what does this have to do on the economics forum? Isn't it a more appropriate place to put it in the development board if this has technical implications for the functionality of bitcoin or crypto in general?

username18333

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Knowledge could but approximate existence.

The problem here is that conventional mathematics uses a flawed (i.e., partially anti-symmetric [i.e., one divided by infinity is equal to zero and one divided by zero is undefined]) numerical system. The Riemann hypothesis should be provable when using Earth’s numerical system with the system’s zero approached from the positive direction (which is of greater magnitude than its positive infinity) in the place of the traditional infinity of the conventional Riemann zeta function.

Quote from: Earth’s set of all real numbers

Code:

ℝ = {*0⁺, …, −*1, …, −1, …, 0⁻, 0⁺, …, 1, …, *1, …, *0⁻}

findftp

legendary

Activity: 1022

Merit: 1008

Delusional crypto obsessionist

Quote from: criptix on January 05, 2015, 08:49:26 PM

didnt read yet, but if its correct the author will get atleast a million $ for it Cheesy

Wow, expect the bitcoin price to jump!
I would exchange all fiat for BTC right now

criptix

legendary

Activity: 2464

Merit: 1145

didnt read yet, but if its correct the author will get atleast a million $ from the Clay Mathematics Institute (CMI) Cheesy

iamback

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 10

I don't have time to study this in detail, and it seems to be off topic of Economics and perhaps belongs in the Technical discussion thread.

But if there is breakthrough on the dimensionality of primes, this could potentially have major implications on cracking public-key cryptography.

findftp

legendary

Activity: 1022

Merit: 1008

Delusional crypto obsessionist

Quote from: Tusk on January 05, 2015, 06:10:41 PM

Here is a link to the shared document any feedback welcome

Riemann hypothesis - Proof
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz5xt1KEGIi-OElBSEtYZjZTLUk/view?usp=sharing

As some of the images were difficult to show in the document here are links to larger ones
Main Diagram
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz5xt1KEGIi-X0EyV3pXM0dsN0E/view?usp=sharing

Critical Strip
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz5xt1KEGIi-WDYtMDd5UDdCMVE/view?usp=sharing

Sine Wave Diagram
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz5xt1KEGIi-TkZJU2c4ZVlXVkE/view?usp=sharing

Prime Numbers
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz5xt1KEGIi-ZHVOcHV1TjFpSTQ/view?usp=sharing

Thanks

So what's your point?
Just dump some random off topic data in this forum?

Tusk

sr. member

Activity: 444

Merit: 260

Here is a link to the shared document any feedback welcome

Riemann hypothesis - Proof
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz5xt1KEGIi-OElBSEtYZjZTLUk/view?usp=sharing

As some of the images were difficult to show in the document here are links to larger ones
Main Diagram
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz5xt1KEGIi-X0EyV3pXM0dsN0E/view?usp=sharing

Critical Strip
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz5xt1KEGIi-WDYtMDd5UDdCMVE/view?usp=sharing

Sine Wave Diagram
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz5xt1KEGIi-TkZJU2c4ZVlXVkE/view?usp=sharing

Prime Numbers
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz5xt1KEGIi-ZHVOcHV1TjFpSTQ/view?usp=sharing

Thanks

Topic: Riemann hypothesis - Proof (Read 2328 times)