It was in Appendix, so it was not the central point of the paper. Now, corrected file is sent into top journal.
Upvote
0
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Riemann Hypothesis is a Theorem
- Thread starter Omega constant
- Start date
Warden_of_the_Storm
Well-Known Member
- Oct 16, 2015
- 15,950
- 7,862
- 31
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Deist
- Marital Status
- Single
Doesn't matter if it's in the appendix or not, you still used a pseudo-scientific claim to justify your mathematical formula, and in this thread you've also said that the formula will be proven in heaven.
Brings into question the whole point of the paper and this thread really.
Upvote
0
My doctoral supervisor found out I was a Christian and said, "Reject Christ and become a doctor."
I didn't refuse, but he didn't let me finish my doctoral thesis and started calling me a leading scholar in front of everyone. He said, "You're either a fool or pretending to be one." They buried him without a Church service.
Upvote
0
Warden_of_the_Storm
Well-Known Member
- Oct 16, 2015
- 15,950
- 7,862
- 31
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Deist
- Marital Status
- Single
First off: I HIGHLY doubt that story.
Secondly: it has absolutely NOTHING to do with what I said.
Upvote
0
I have many stories. They are very unusual. Some of them are secret ones. For example, I have seen an angel.
Upvote
0
Warden_of_the_Storm
Well-Known Member
- Oct 16, 2015
- 15,950
- 7,862
- 31
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Deist
- Marital Status
- Single
And I'll repeat the second point you blithely and plainly ignored: it has absolutely NOTHING to do with what I said.
Upvote
0
You have written "But we know". In reply that I have corrected the file. I wrote, that this is like my supervisor got to know that I am a believer, so he started to hate me.
Upvote
0
Warden_of_the_Storm
Well-Known Member
- Oct 16, 2015
- 15,950
- 7,862
- 31
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Deist
- Marital Status
- Single
It's not the same since it just invalidates your work. You cannot claim to solve a mathematical hypothesis to make it a theorem and then in the same breathe says that 'All-Knowing Source of Live gave you wisdom' and that ' You cannot know all and at the same time doubt that the All-knowing One exists.' and use that to explain things.
Even in the appendix of a paper, it heavily calls into question a lot of things, especially your own claims in the paper.
Upvote
0
Warden_of_the_Storm
Well-Known Member
- Oct 16, 2015
- 15,950
- 7,862
- 31
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Deist
- Marital Status
- Single
Maybe respond to the whole comment instead of taking little bits out of context. Or just don't respond at all.
Upvote
0
At this point Festus interrupted Paul's defense. “You are out of your mind, Paul!” he shouted. “Your great learning is driving you insane.”.
Acts 26:24
Upvote
0
Warden_of_the_Storm
Well-Known Member
- Oct 16, 2015
- 15,950
- 7,862
- 31
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Deist
- Marital Status
- Single
Upvote
0
Hans Blaster
Area Meathead
- Mar 11, 2017
- 24,164
- 17,804
- 56
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Democrat
It was a link to someone's paper. How do you "correct" that?
Upvote
0
PloverWing
Episcopalian
- May 5, 2012
- 5,577
- 6,653
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
The paper is better now that the references to P=NP and the All-knowing Source of Life have been omitted.
It looks like the appendix contains the main thrust of your argument, so it should probably be at the beginning of the paper, before you dive into the details of references [3] and [4]. I don't, however, follow what you mean by "The proof of Riemann Hypothesis is first step of proving the generalized Riemann hypothesis". This brings me back to one of my earlier comments: Clearly state what you are proving. Not just "the Riemann Hypothesis" or "the generalized Riemann Hypothesis", but the exact, full mathematical statement of the theorem you're proving.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
