Slashdot Mirror


Twin Prime Proof Erroneous

mindriot writes "The fairly recent perceived breakthrough in prime number theory regarding twin primes, as mentioned on slashdot, is apparently not quite perfect: 'On April 23rd, Andrew Granville of the Universite de Montreal and K. Soundararajan of the University of Michigan found a technical difficulty buried in one of the arguments in the preprint of Goldston and Yildrim. The main issue is that some quantities which were believed to be small error terms are actually the same order of magnitude as the main term. For now this difficulty remains unresolved.' A more detailed technical description is also available."

199 comments

  1. Re:anyone got some asprin? by SkArcher · · Score: 1

    Nope, they lost me as well. Those people are Real geeks. :)

    It would also appear that their server was a bit fragile, it isn't responding fast and I think it'll be succumbing to the /. effect.

    --

    An infinite number of monkeys will eventually come up with the complete works of /.
  2. Idea may lead to new record, not twin prime proof by Dominic_Mazzoni · · Score: 5, Informative

    The last paragraph of the "more detailed technical description" is interesting (shown here in LaTeX notation):

    The consensus is that the definition of $\gamma_R$ needs to be changed so that terms like this one do not appear. However, it is not obvious how to do this change. Work is continuing by Goldston and Yildirim and others to rectify the problem. It does seem reasonable to believe that an improvement on the current world record for small gaps between primes will be achieved by these methods; however, the more dramatic result $p_{n+1} - p_n < (\log n)^\alpha$ for some $\alpha < 1$ seems less likely.

    Unless I'm misunderstanding something, it would be more clear if they said that the inequality above holds for infinitely many $n$, because it certainly couldn't hold for all $n$.

    Essentially they're claiming that it's less likely now that the twin prime conjecture will ever be proved using this method, but there's still a pretty reasonable chance that the proof will result in something along the lines that there are infinitely many pairs of consecutive primes that differ only by x, where x is not quite as small as 2 (which is what the twin primes conjecture says) but x is smaller than any value of x that was previously proven. Which would be cool, but nothing to open champagne over.

  3. reminds me of a bad math joke by schematix · · Score: 5, Funny

    heard this in an engineering class the other day... What's the contour integral around Western Europe? A: Zero, because all the Poles are in Eastern Europe!

    --
    Scott
    1. Re:reminds me of a bad math joke by dracken · · Score: 2, Informative

      A worse math joke - Why did the mathematician name is dog cauchy ?

      Because he left his residue at every pole

      Ducks :P

    2. Re:reminds me of a bad math joke by RzUpAnmsCwrds · · Score: 1

      Three statisticians go hunting.

      They see a prize buck.

      One statistician fires... Bang... 10 meters to the left.

      The second statistician fires... Bang... 10 meters to the right.

      The third statistician jumps up and down, yelling "We Got It!".

  4. i dunno man by SweetAndSourJesus · · Score: 0, Troll

    How much more do we need to know about the causes for cancer or AIDS?

    Shouldn't we be looking for the cures instead?

    --

    --
    the strongest word is still the word "free"
    1. Re:i dunno man by Pinguu · · Score: 1

      That's what I meant :)
      Hmm... I wonder why I was modded down when it was neither a flamebait nor was it offtopic?

      --
      --
    2. Re:i dunno man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm... well let's see... Since prime numbers aren't related to either cancer or AIDS, it was most certainly offtopic.

      It was probably flamebait as well because it was unnecessarily antagonistic.

    3. Re:i dunno man by renehollan · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      How much more do we need to know about the causes for cancer or AIDS?

      Shouldn't we be looking for the cures instead?

      I am firmly convinced that people with this attitude should be killed and eradicated from the face of the earth as soon as possible. Perhaps I should not "feed the troll", but rest assured this shall be the vilest meal this troll will eat, and I've karma to burn.

      Trust too, alas, that I'm far too much of a coward to seek out this troll and perform the deed myself. But, this is Slashdot, and rants rein supreme, so I shall rant on.

      When someone suggests "Shouldn't we...," what they really mean, is "shouldn't someone other than me but who I shall include in a collective that includes me" perform some deed, presumably for my benefit, because they appear to have the requesite ability.

      Gee, with that line of thinking, "Shouldn't that hot girl in the skin tight pants pull them down while I fuck her good and hard?" After all, she has a body made for screwing, and owes it to the rest of us, no?

      Well, NO!, she doesn't (and yes, this does sadden me some, but I'll get over it), and neither do we owe our skill to others without our consent.

      You, sir (and I use the salutation reluctantly and with the intent of irony), would enslave those who could execute your wishes. The world of free men and women has no need of such slavemasters. Begone! And, whilst I may be coward enough to spare your life, and not rip it from your soul, rest assured that I dream and pray for your violent, and painful demise. Painful certainly, for no doubt this rant will be modded to the oblivion reserved for those who continue to cherish liberty in a world of comfortable enslavement, and the thought of a painful end doth grant solace over the inevitable loss of karma this post will bring.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    4. Re:i dunno man by Asahi+Super+Dry · · Score: 1

      Ayn, is that you?

  5. Re:The answer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    42 retard

  6. Error? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Damn, I forgot to carry the 1...

  7. If the cures need a more powerful computer... by www.microsoft.com · · Score: 1

    ...that need better and more powerful mathematics.

    Knowledge never is a waste of time.

    1. Re:If the cures need a more powerful computer... by Pinguu · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I agree, so maybe they should work on better and more powerful mathematics instead of working on pointless mathematics?

      --
      --
    2. Re:If the cures need a more powerful computer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What was once pointless mathematics has often become the most important. Just because you don't have the farsight to see a point doesn't mean there will never be one. Anyway, it sounds like trolls to me. It's hard to tell ignorance and humor from trolling.

    3. Re:If the cures need a more powerful computer... by LuckyLeprechaun31 · · Score: 1

      If my computer often gives me messages about "rundll32.exe" when I try to do basic things like changing the time or the screen saver, is it a virus? Let me know.

  8. from a mathematics student by rock_climbing_guy · · Score: 3, Funny

    I have no idea how this proof works because the server melted already.

    --
    Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
  9. The Slashdot effect by AtomicX · · Score: 2, Funny

    Their webserver it seems, " is apparently not quite perfect:" It has already been /.ed Obviously evidence of a conspiracy to cover up the mistakes in the theorem. Sssshhh!

    1. Re:The Slashdot effect by KingDaveRa · · Score: 1

      Their webserver it seems, " is apparently not quite perfect:" It has already been /.ed Obviously evidence of a conspiracy to cover up the mistakes in the theorem. Sssshhh!

      Maybe they should set the maximum connections on the server to a prime number.

    2. Re:The Slashdot effect by beebware · · Score: 1

      Well, 2 is a prime number isn't it?

  10. Re:anyone got some asprin? by SUB7IME · · Score: 5, Informative

    Twin primes are two prime numbers that differ by a value of two - for instance, 17 and 19, or 29 and 31.

  11. I have an alternate proof by CTalkobt · · Score: 4, Funny

    but the space that I'm allowed to type in here is too short.. :-)

    --
    There's a gorilla from Manilla whose a fella that stinks of vanilla and has salmonella.
    1. Re:I have an alternate proof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You just tried to pull a Fermat, my friend. Unfortunately, you failed it. Why? You see, the space with which one is provided in to post is a form sent over HTTP as POST data. As such its maximum size is approximately 64 kilobytes, or 65,536 characters. Andrew Wiles' proof of the theorem, based upon the fact that Fermat's Last Theorem was in fact a subset of the Shimura-Taniyama-Weil conjecture ran to approximately 100 pages of text. 100 pages of plain text, assuming a maximum of 200 characters per line and no more than 70 lines, runs to just 14,000 characters, greatly below that which may fit inside the Slashdot comment space. Besides, Fermat's original marginalum read "Demonstrationem mirabilem hanc marginis exigiutas non caperet".

    2. Re:I have an alternate proof by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1
      100 pages of plain text, assuming a maximum of 200 characters per line and no more than 70 lines, runs to just 14,000 characters

      100 x 200 * 70 > 14,000.

    3. Re:I have an alternate proof by orkysoft · · Score: 1

      Actually, 200*70*100 = 1 400 000, which is far larger than the maximum number of allowed characters in a sig.

      --

      I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
    4. Re:I have an alternate proof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed. He should have put that in a signature.

    5. Re:I have an alternate proof by smileyy · · Score: 1

      Isn't there some sort of moderation like -1 (Has a Rush quote in sig)

      --
      pooptruck
    6. Re:I have an alternate proof by Wolfier · · Score: 1

      I have an alternate proof too, and it is considerably shorter than yours, since it fits in the submit box. However no matter how I change it the lameless filter always says "have you cut your tongue?" someone please help

    7. Re:I have an alternate proof by cruppel · · Score: 1

      read what he typed again

      100 x 200 * 70 > 14,000

      he wrote an inequality

    8. Re:I have an alternate proof by The_Spide · · Score: 1
      How many /.ers thought of Fermat's last theorem when they read the parent? ...
      I have discovered a truly marvelous demonstration of this proposition that this margin is too narrow to contain.
    9. Re:I have an alternate proof by heffrey · · Score: 1

      I have an alternative joke..... Oh no wait a minute I don't....

  12. wow, that's gotta suck by cheezus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    To think you solved something like that, and to be ready to publish, after all that hard work.... then...... oops. guess that doesns't work

    man. i feel sorry for those guys

    --
    /bin/fortune | slashdotsig.sh
    1. Re:wow, that's gotta suck by thefroatgt · · Score: 1

      How often does this happen in the math world? Seems like it could happen quite a bit, either before or after publishing.

    2. Re:wow, that's gotta suck by Q+Who · · Score: 1

      This happens all the time, except that no one finds the errors.

  13. mirror by jroysdon · · Score: 5, Informative

    aimath.org/primegaps/
    aimath.org/primegaps/residueerror/

    I'm still working on mirroring all 47 images, but the text is there, and the img tags have great alt text descriptions.

  14. Re:predicted posts to this article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is nothing trollish in the parent. It merely illustrated the problem with almost all posts that appear on math topic articles. This really isn't a site that mathematicians frequent, at least not ones past dilettante level.

  15. Re:imagine that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Yeah, right, like I can imagine CmdrTaco rejecting a story because he read the math and found the error.

  16. A serious question - i'm not trolling, honest! by KingDaveRa · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I see a lot about these sorts of massive mathematical problems. I can understand calculating pi to the nth point as it is used in calculations, but what sort of benefit does mankind get from working out twin primes? In fact, do primes do anything for us anyway?

    I'm well aware of what primes are, I just have never found a use for them!

    1. Re:A serious question - i'm not trolling, honest! by cybercrap · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes considering a lot of our encryption is based on prime numbers. So you figure a simple way to get around it and you make a lot of encryption outdated and useless. So yes, it is important.

    2. Re:A serious question - i'm not trolling, honest! by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, pretty much all current cryptography techniques depend on primes. Whether knowing anything about the occurrence of twin primes has any bearing on crypto, I have no idea.

      The longer answer to your question is: who the hell knows? One of the fascinating things about math is how results that seem utterly abstract when they're [invented | discovered] (not going to get into that argument right now) turn out to have profound applications years or decades or even centuries down the road. Linear algebra was an interesting but rather small and not terribly important field of study before computers came along ...

      The twin prime problem may remain a curiosity of number theory forever, or it may turn out to be fundamental to some new application that's just down the road; there's no way to know. But given the history of math's progress from pure theory to the basis of technology we use every day, I'm betting on the latter.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    3. Re:A serious question - i'm not trolling, honest! by rock_climbing_guy · · Score: 5, Informative
      One really good example of what prime number theory is good for is cryptography.

      For example, in mathematics, it is a well-known fact that it is an easy problem to multiply two numbers. It is a very hard problem to take a number and factor it into the numbers that were multiplied to get the number, especially if it is a very large number.

      If we multiply two very large prime numbers, the result is a very large number that is very difficult to factor; when it is factored, the result will be that it factors only into the original two very large prime numbers.

      Prime numbers also have application in the idea of 'remote coin flipping.' ie. Using prime number theory, it is in theory possible for me to do the equivalent of flipping a coin and you having to guess if it's heads or tails.

      If you still don't understand, consider this. Which is easier to do:
      Multiply 13*17*19*29*57*91*43
      --or--
      Factor 27159925611 into it's prime factors.

      If you can find an easy way to do the second problem, you just might find yourself considered a threat to national security.

      --
      Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
    4. Re:A serious question - i'm not trolling, honest! by HeghmoH · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Pi accurate to about forty-some digits would be accurate enough to calculate the circumference of a circle the size of the visible universe with an error the size of a proton.

      How, exactly, is calculating billions of digits of pi useful, again?

      On the other hand, primes are used for all kinds of good stuff, such as protecting your credit card numbers from evil people. Your conceptions seem backwards.

      --
      Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
    5. Re:A serious question - i'm not trolling, honest! by Obyron · · Score: 1

      Whether knowing anything about the occurrence of twin primes has any bearing on crypto, I have no idea.

      I have very little knowledge of primes and cryptography, but I do know that the holy grail is the search for larger primes.

      Could the importance of twin primes be that if a corrolary is found that will allow one to predict higher prime numbers because of the n that separates them, it would then become easier to "discover" larger and larger prime numbers?

      --
      --Obyron
    6. Re:A serious question - i'm not trolling, honest! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Multiply 13*17*19*29*57*91*43
      --or--
      Factor 27159925611 into it's prime factors.

      If you can find an easy way to do the second problem, you just might find yourself considered a threat to national security.

      Easy. :-)

      Here's my easy way, I verified that 13*17*19*29*57*91*43 = 27159925611. I already know that 13, 17, 19, 29, 57, 91, and 43 are prime. No sweat, but you did make it easy by using the same factors.

      It's also easy to run "factor 27159925611". My slow CPU can do it in under .01 seconds.

    7. Re:A serious question - i'm not trolling, honest! by gloth · · Score: 4, Funny
      $ factor 27159925611
      27159925611: 3 7 13 13 17 19 19 29 43
      $ echo '13*17*19*29*57*91*43' | bc
      27159925611

      Thus, on the command line, the factorization is easier!

    8. Re:A serious question - i'm not trolling, honest! by acidblood · · Score: 3, Informative

      Your example is pretty poor, in the sense that special-purpose factoring algorithms (Pollard rho, Pollard p-1, Lenstra's ECM) can comfortably factor numbers with many small factors, regardless of the number's size. In fact, ECMing 40-digit prime factors out of numbers with tens of thousands of digits is commonplace today, as is ECMing smaller-sized factors from numbers of millions of digits.

      Now factoring a number 200 digits long with only two (and equally-sized) factors would be a world record.

      --

      Join the NFSNET. Our prime goal is making little numbers out of big ones. http://www.nfsnet.org/

    9. Re:A serious question - i'm not trolling, honest! by kimgh · · Score: 1
      1. To look for patterns (See Carl Sagan/Contact)

      2. Test out new computer hardware/software

      3. The thrill of the chase. Some people climb mountains, other people calculate billions of digits of Pi.

    10. Re:A serious question - i'm not trolling, honest! by dublisk · · Score: 1

      First off, do we really need a practical use? Why do we study literature or art? Do we need practical uses for those things too?

      Nevertheless, prime numbers are important for cryptography. This has to do with factoring a number into prime powers. Any positive integer can be written uniquely as a product of prime powers. If I give you two primes such as 6421 and 7873, it's easy to just multiply them and get 50552543. However, given 50552543 it's not at all obvious that the only way to write this as a product of prime powers is 6421*7873. Cryptography is based around such functions that are easier one way than the other. A greater knowledge about primes and their distribution means a greater knowledge of making and breaking certain cryptosystems.

    11. Re:A serious question - i'm not trolling, honest! by HeghmoH · · Score: 0

      1. To look for patterns (See Carl Sagan/Contact)
      Right.... You'd be more productive feeding the Bible into a random number generator.

      2. Test out new computer hardware/software
      This is not useful. There are better ways to test hardware/software.

      3. The thrill of the chase. Some people climb mountains, other people calculate billions of digits of Pi.
      This is not useful.

      If you're going to reply to posts, you should try to be more relevant to what they say. I never said calculating billions of digits was boring or stupid, just that it wasn't useful in a practical sense. I said this because the post I replied to said that it was useful in a practical sense. Your rebuttals aren't.

      --
      Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
    12. Re:A serious question - i'm not trolling, honest! by Zaak · · Score: 2, Informative

      I do know that the holy grail is the search for larger primes.

      Actually, finding large primes is pretty easy. Taking a large number and finding its prime factors is not. This conjecture/proof doesn't seem to have any immediate bearing on cryptography.

      TTFN

    13. Re:A serious question - i'm not trolling, honest! by djembe2k · · Score: 1
      Parent poster wrote:
      what sort of benefit does mankind get from working out twin primes? In fact, do primes do anything for us anyway?
      With all due respect, who cares? What sort of benefit does the mankind get from the Mona Lisa? From NASCAR? From owning pets? Need I go on . . . . ?

      Why does everything have to be for some benefit? Most math doesn't have an application, not now and not ever. We're doing more math everyday than we'll ever find uses for. Mostly it is an aesthetic pursuit. People like doing it. They like seeing it done. They find it challenging and rewarding. A few people get paid to do it, and some (fewer) get a certain amount of fame from it. That's good enough.

      Besides, I can think of much worse ways we could spend our time, but if I really started to go into that, I'd be trolling . . . .

    14. Re:A serious question - i'm not trolling, honest! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I already know that 13, 17, 19, 29, 57, 91, and 43 are prime.

      Hello?
      57 = 3*19
      91 = 7*13

      Either you know something is true, or you're not sure. But you can't *know* something *false*. Please go to the nearest hospital for a brain scan.

    15. Re:A serious question - i'm not trolling, honest! by phliar · · Score: 4, Interesting
      I can understand calculating pi to the nth point as it is used in calculations...
      That is not a very good reason! Let's say we use pi = 355/113 -- an approximation that's been known for many centuries -- to calculate the circumference of the earth. Using that value of pi our estimate will be off by about 30 feet (about 0.00003%). Even 22/7 is only off by 0.1%.

      No; we calculate the umpty-bazillionth digit of pi for the same reason Mallory wanted to climb Everest: because it's there -- and there's cool shit to see along the way.

      --
      Unlimited growth == Cancer.
    16. Re:A serious question - i'm not trolling, honest! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...well, Linear Algebra was extremely important before computers came along. Quantum mechanics is all just tedious lin. algebra.

    17. Re:A serious question - i'm not trolling, honest! by the+end+of+britain · · Score: 3, Informative

      Number theorists have proven that there exists no polynomial function f(x) such that f(x)={primes}. There is, however, a vast literature concerned with the distribution of primes. For instance: Prime Number Theorem: "the prime number theorem gives an asymptotic form for the prime counting function pi(N), which counts the number of primes less than some integer n." Bertrand's Postulate: If n > 3, there is always at least one prime p such that n is less than p which is less than 2n-2. Wilson's Theorem: "if and only if p is a prime, then (p-1)! +1 is a multiple of p, that is (p-1)! congruent to -1 (mod p)." (quotations from mathworld.com) Theorems such as these provide insight into the distribution of primes throughout the natural numbers. The Twin Prime Conjecture, if resolved, would provide additional insight into this distribution, which would be of fundamental theoretical and practical importance. For instance, it is currently regarded as hopelessly time consuming to factor large composites--public key cryptography is based on this fact. But I am not aware of any proof that factoring such numbers *must* take a long time--that they do is an interesting state of affairs, but it might not reflect the nature of the universe so much as our lack of knowledge about prime numbers. Solving the TPC would be a step in remediating that deficiency.

      --
      "Oh, the tragedy of math gone wrong. I can't even talk about it." -Wil Wheaton http://www.wilwheaton.net
    18. Re:A serious question - i'm not trolling, honest! by wcbarksdale · · Score: 1

      What I find amusing is that modern cryptography, the primary application of number theory, is essentially about creating hard problems.

    19. Re:A serious question - i'm not trolling, honest! by Hognoxious · · Score: 1
      Now factoring a number 200 digits long with only two (and equally-sized) factors would be a world record.
      If the two factors are equally sized, wouldn't you just be taking the square root?
      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    20. Re:A serious question - i'm not trolling, honest! by Carnivorous+Carrot · · Score: 1

      >> 1. To look for patterns (See Carl Sagan/Contact)
      >
      > Right.... You'd be more productive feeding the
      > Bible into a random number generator.

      Actually, that was kinda Carl's point. It would be a real message from the creator of reality.

      >> 2. Test out new computer hardware/software
      >
      > This is not useful. There are better ways to test hardware/software.

      Not to test -- to exercise it to demonstrate power, especially when the identical algorithms are used. It's the processor equivalent of testing Quake timedemos on new 3D boards.

      >> 3. The thrill of the chase. Some people climb
      >> mountains, other people calculate billions of
      >> digits of Pi.
      >
      > This is not useful.

      I don't understand what part of "thrill of the chase" you thought must be useful. It is useful in-and-of-itself as a mental exercise. If that isn't useful to the human race, I'd like to see how you define useful.

      --
      "Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
    21. Re:A serious question - i'm not trolling, honest! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes it would, but he probably meant equal-sized in terms of digits required to represent the number.

  17. Re:The answer... by jagilbertvt · · Score: 1

    You are both wrong. Neither 42 nor 46 is a prime number.

  18. For crying out loud! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    This story doesn't have anything to do with SCO! Come on, where's today's SCO story? This isn't funny, man, I need my fix!

    1. Re:For crying out loud! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahhhh... thanks... my fix of the "Where's my SCO story" is satisfied for the day...

  19. Re:anyone got some asprin? by SkArcher · · Score: 1

    Yeah, i got that bit, it was the detailed proof that made my head hurt

    --

    An infinite number of monkeys will eventually come up with the complete works of /.
  20. hehehe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If I knew I was going to get modded "Troll" I would have at least come up with a decent troll :P

  21. Re:predicted posts to this article by rock_climbing_guy · · Score: 1

    Actually, I know a mathematics professor who has talked about reading on /.

    --
    Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
  22. Maths jokes = Instant karma! by Dthoma · · Score: 5, Funny

    Q: What did the constipated mathematician do?
    A: He worked it out with a pencil!

    Q: What's purple and commutes?
    A: An Abelian grape.

    Q: Why do you never hear the number 288 on television?
    A: It's two gross.

    Q: What do you get when you cross a mosquito with a rock climber?
    A: Nothing. You can't cross a vector and a scalar.

    Q. How many mathematicians does it take to change a lightbulb?
    A. 1, he gives the lightbulb to 3 engineers, thus reducing the problem to a previously solved joke.

    Q: What's big, grey, and proves the uncountability of the reals?
    A: Cantor's diagonal elephant.

    Q: What's yellow and equivalent to the Axiom of Choice?
    A: Zorn's Lemon.

    Q: What's yellow, normed, and complete?
    A: A Bananach space.

    Q: What is very old, used by farmers, and obeys the fundamental theorem of arithmetic?
    A: An antique tractorisation domain.

    Q: What is hallucinogenic and exists for every group with order divisible by p^k?
    A: A psilocybin p-subgroup.

    Q: What is often used by Canadians to help solve certain differential equations?
    A: the Lacrosse transform.

    Q: What is clear and used by trendy sophisticated engineers to solve other differential equations?
    A: The Perrier transform.

    Q: Who knows everything there is to be known about vector analysis?
    A: The Oracle of del phi!

    =======

    Halfway through a recent airplane flight from Warsaw to New York, there was nearly a major disaster when the flight crew got sick from eating the fish. After they had passed out, one of the flight attendants asked over the intercom if there were any pilots in the cabin.

    An elderly gentleman, who had flown a bit in the war, raised his hand and was rushed into the cockpit of the 747. When he got there, took the seat, and saw all the displays and controls, he realized he was in over his head. He told the flight attendant that he didn't think he could fly this plane. When asked why not, he replied,

    "I am just a simple Pole in a complex plane"

    So, they just had to rely on the method of steepest descents.

    =======

    You know that during the Great Flood, Noah brought along two of every species for reproductive purposes. Well, after a few weeks on the ark, all the couples were getting along fine, except for these two snakes. Day and night, Noah worried that this was going to mean the end of this species.

    Finally when the flood ended and the ark hit ground, the two snakes darted out of the ship and headed to the nearest picnic table where they started to "go at it". It was then that Noah realized that...

    Adders can't multiply without their log tables.

    --

    Note to M1-ers: a curt but otherwise insightful message is not "Flamebait" or "Troll".

    1. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by moonbender · · Score: 1

      I'm a CS student in my second semester, and I only got two or three of those. Guess I'll have to pay more attention my analysis classes. ;)

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
    2. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yuo = t3h gh3y

    3. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Me=hunt you down and kill you

    4. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is ok, I am a CS student with one semester to go and I only got 5 or 6.

    5. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dunno what that's from, but it says uid, and gid.. and talks of groups and users. So therefore it must be SCO's unix code. You're the one that put it in linux, aren't you, Coward?!

    6. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by vadim_t · · Score: 2, Funny

      This is probably very inexact, it's from memory and translated from spanish:

      A man had to take a plane but he was very nervous thinking there might be somebody with a bomb on board. He went to the pilot and asked how likely it was that there was somebody with a bomb on board.

      The pilot answered "Well, I wouldn't worry about it at all. It's very unlikely. Probably something like 1 chance in a million". The man feeling somewhat better then asked: "And what is the chance of that there are two bombs on board?". The pilot answered "Oh, now that is extremely unlikely. I'd say it's so unlikely that you could say it's practically impossible"

      The man feeling relieved then said "That's what I thought as well, which is why I brought this bomb with me".

    7. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by Dominic_Mazzoni · · Score: 5, Informative

      I know this is incredibly nerdy, but it sounds like some people would appreciate it if the jokes were explained to them...

      Q: What did the constipated mathematician do?
      A: He worked it out with a pencil!


      OK, not going to try to explain this one.

      Q: What's purple and commutes?
      A: An Abelian grape.


      A group is a set of things (think "numbers", but they could be sides of a cube, or colors, or anything you want) along with an operation defined on them (like addition or multiplication, but it doesn't have to work like those). When the operation on the group happens to be commutative (like 2+4 = 4+2), the group is called Abelian

      Q: Why do you never hear the number 288 on television?
      A: It's two gross.


      A "gross" is a dozen dozen, or 144. Not a very mathematical joke.

      Q: What do you get when you cross a mosquito with a rock climber?
      A: Nothing. You can't cross a vector and a scalar.


      The joke is referring to a Cross Product, an operation defined on two vectors. You can't take the cross-product of a vector and a scalar.

      Q. How many mathematicians does it take to change a lightbulb?
      A. 1, he gives the lightbulb to 3 engineers, thus reducing the problem to a previously solved joke.


      When a mathematician needs to prove that A implies B, they may instead prove that A implies C where "C implies B" was already proved by someone else, or in a previous theorem.

      Q: What's big, grey, and proves the uncountability of the reals?
      A: Cantor's diagonal elephant.


      The joke is referring to the Cantor Diagonal Argument, a proof technique that Cantor originally used to prove that even if you tried to associate one real number with every integer, there'd still be real numbers left over. (Amazingly, you can "count" the rational numbers - i.e. all of the possible fractional numbers. As a math major to show you sometime, it's a neat trick.)

      Q: What's yellow and equivalent to the Axiom of Choice?
      A: Zorn's Lemon.


      Zorn's Lemma is a mathematical statement which turns out to be true if the Axiom of Choice is assumed to be true, or false if the Axiom of Choice is assumed to be false.

      Q: What's yellow, normed, and complete?
      A: A Bananach space.


      A is space (a set of numbers with a lot of useful operations defined on them) that has a normalization operator defined, and is "complete", which means that the limits of all sequences you can define using numbers in the space are also in the space.

      Q: What is very old, used by farmers, and obeys the fundamental theorem of arithmetic?
      A: An antique tractorisation domain.


      Q: What is hallucinogenic and exists for every group with order divisible by p^k?
      A: A psilocybin p-subgroup.


      A Sylow p-Subgroup is a certain type of subgroup (see the definition of a group above).

      Q: What is often used by Canadians to help solve certain differential equations?
      A: the Lacrosse transform.


      The is a technique that makes certain differential equations a lot easier to solve - essentially you take a complicated D.E., substitute certain things in place of any derivatives you see by looking them up in a table, then solve the resulting equation using normal algebra, and finally transform it back also by looking up things in a table.

      Q: What is clear and used by trendy sophisticated engineers to solve other differential equations?
      A: The Perrier transform.


      The Fourier Transform is also used in signal processing, including sound analysis and sound compression algorithms like MP3 and Ogg Vorbis.

      Q:

    8. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by isomeme · · Score: 4, Funny
      "I am just a simple Pole in a complex plane"
      Good thing he took the copilot's seat; the system becomes unstable if there's a Pole in the left half-plane.
      --
      When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a skull.
    9. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Q: Who knows everything there is to be known about vector analysis?
      A: The Oracle of del phi!

      Hmmmm, I don't get this one. Sorry. Anyone?


      The "del" operator (looks like an upside-down capital delta) is a sum of directional partial derivative operators defined in R^3. google for "del operator." This is probably a joke on vector analysis by taking the partials, phi being an angle(?). Perhaps they meant taking a gradient, but that would ruin the pun.
    10. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by jesco · · Score: 1

      A priest, a physicist and a mathematician are trapped in a burning hotel. The only way out is to jump out of the window and try to land in the nearby pool. So, the priest starts first, he makes a last prayer, jumps and hits the pool. Saved. Next comes the physicist, he looks down, does a short calculation in his head, jumps and is saved. Last comes the mathematician, he looks down, and remains at the window calculating desperately. After a couple of minutes, he jumps, too. However, he flies off into the sky. What happened? Wrong sign.

    11. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Guess I'll have to pay more attention my analysis classes. ;)"

      And in your english classes as well :)

    12. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by Schreck · · Score: 4, Informative

      Q: What is often used by Canadians to help solve certain differential equations?
      A: the Lacrosse transform.


      The is a technique that makes certain differential equations a lot easier to solve - essentially you take a complicated D.E., substitute certain things in place of any derivatives you see by looking them up in a table, then solve the resulting equation using normal algebra, and finally transform it back also by looking up things in a table.


      The joke is referring to the Laplace transform. There is no Lacrosse transform.


      Q: Who knows everything there is to be known about vector analysis?
      A: The Oracle of del phi!


      Hmmmm, I don't get this one. Sorry. Anyone?


      The del operator is fundamental in vector calculus. You can define the gradient, curl, divergence and the Laplacian with it. It's also known as nabla.


      So, they just had to rely on the method of steepest descents.

      A way to find the nearest local minimum of a function - works whenever the function is smooth near that minimum.


      No. You're talking about the gradient descent method. The method of steepest descent is a way to find the asymptotic series of a function. I know Weisstein's Mathworld agrees with you, but check their references on that page. Arfken and Morse, Feshbach agree with me! I know because I've been studying those two books on this very subject the whole evening before I checked Slashdot. I was mightily surprised to see the method's name mentioned here, believe me.
    13. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by Schreck · · Score: 1

      Q: What is very old, used by farmers, and obeys the fundamental theorem of arithmetic?
      A: An antique tractorisation domain.


      You missed this one. The joke is referring to unique factorisation domains. For example, the integers is a unique factorisation domain. 12=2*2*3, 15=3*5... You know what it means. Of course, changing the order of the factors doesn't count as a different factorisation.

    14. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by Schreck · · Score: 1

      "I am just a simple Pole in a complex plane"

      Given a complex function, a pole is just a point where the function is not defined (usually because something goes to infinity).


      Sorry to reply again, but this one still needs clearing. Pole is always a singularity. In fact an analytic function may have two different kinds of singularities: poles and essential singularities. Poles are those singularities that can be removed by multiplying the function with a polynomial of a high enough degree. For example, 1/(1-z) is analytic everywhere except at z = 1, where it has a simple pole. It can be removed by multiplying the function by 1-z. Any pole that can be removed with a polynomial of first degree is called simple.
    15. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by pardonne · · Score: 1

      I am way behind in my math. For a causal, stable system
      shouldn't all the Poles be in the lhp?

      Pardonne

    16. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by gfranch247 · · Score: 1

      Q: Why do you never hear the number 288 on television? A: It's two gross. A "gross" is a dozen dozen, or 144. Not a very mathematical joke. You're being too intelligent for this part of the joke. It's supposed to be read literally two ate eight Get it? A person named "two" "ate" a person named eight.

    17. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're confusing the joke:

      Q: Why was 9 afraid of 7?
      A: Because 789.

      The first guy had it correctly. You're a moron.

    18. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by kcelery · · Score: 1

      Try progressive transformation here:

      too grotesque => two grotesque => two gross

      Banana space=> Banach space

      Zorn's lemma=>Zorn's lemon

      Abelian group => abelian group => commutative group => commutative grape => commutes and purple.

      But I still couldn't get the oracle of del phi part!!!

    19. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by Grizzlysmit · · Score: 1

      Ahhhh nostalgia, I miss my maths so bad; thats it no more procrastination I need to go back to uni and get that Phd. :-)

      --
      in my life God comes first.... but Linux is pretty high after that :-D
      Francis Smit
    20. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by Farley+Mullet · · Score: 1

      Just to be extra pedantic. . .

      Q: What do you get when you cross a mosquito with a rock climber?
      A: Nothing. You can't cross a vector and a scalar.

      The joke is referring to a Cross Product, an operation defined on two vectors. You can't take the cross-product of a vector and a scalar.
      The cross product is in fact only defined for pairs of (real, i think) 3-vectors.
    21. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by esonik · · Score: 1

      Next comes the physicist, he looks down, does a short calculation in his head, jumps and is saved.

      oh this is so unlikely, i think it should read:

      "Next comes the physicist, he looks down, does a short calculation in his head, jumps and misses by one meter. What happened ? He calculated only up to orders of magnitude."

      or maybe:

      "He got caught by a four-sigma event. (he was a High Energy Phsicist)"

      or maybe:

      "He assumed periodic boundary conditions. (he was a condensed matter theoretician)"

      or maybe:

      "He neglected all factors of 2 Pi."

      or maybe:

      "He had set hbar=c=1."

    22. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by isomeme · · Score: 1

      That just goes to show you what having two decades between you and your last systems engineering course will do. :)

      s/pilot/copilot/
      s/left/right/

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a skull.
    23. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by Carnivorous+Carrot · · Score: 1

      CS doesn't even require differential equations, for goodness' sake. I hadda take that over the summer for kicks and giggles.

      --
      "Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
    24. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by Carnivorous+Carrot · · Score: 1

      >> Q: What do you get when you cross a mosquito
      >> with a rock climber?
      >> A: Nothing. You can't cross a vector and a
      >> scalar.
      >
      > The joke is referring to a Cross Product
      > [wolfram.com], an operation defined on two
      > vectors. You can't take the cross-product of a
      > vector and a scalar.

      Ok, I get how a mountain climber is a "scalar" (scaler, scaling the mountain.) But how is a mosquito a vector? It's quite a stretch to suggest a mosquito being a vector for a disease (said usage of vector already being a stretch in the real world.)

      >> Q: What's big, grey, and proves the
      >> uncountability of the reals?
      >> A: Cantor's diagonal elephant.
      >
      > The joke is referring to the Cantor Diagonal
      > Argument ...

      And how does the elephant come into it?

      >> Q: What is often used by Canadians to help
      >> solve certain differential equations?
      >> A: the Lacrosse transform.
      >
      > The is a technique that makes certain
      > differential equations a lot easier to solve ... and what, Canadians play a lot of Lacrosse or something? Perhaps "What is often used by all-girls schools to solve..." would have been funnier.

      And where's "Why was six afraid? Because 7 8 9!"

      And the 31 OCT == 25 DEC joke?

      --
      "Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
    25. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by heffrey · · Score: 1

      The cross product is defined for pairs of 3-vectors over any field (real, complex, finite etc.)

    26. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by heffrey · · Score: 1

      I think that what we learn from all this is that mathematicians are not very good at making jokes. These jokes are all terrible...or is that the whole point of jokes?

      Note that I am a mathematician so I feel justified to slag off my fellow maths types.

    27. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by stanmann · · Score: 1

      Actually, you got it wrong too.
      It was
      Q: Why was 6 afraid of 7?
      A: Because 789

      --
      Food not Bombs is a nice platitude but it breaks down when you notice that the Bombees are usually well fed
    28. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by Fluid+Truth · · Score: 1

      I think that it's just the whole point of puns, not jokes in general. :-)

      --
      Apparently, of the rich, by the rich, for the rich.
    29. Re:Maths jokes = Instant karma! by Debillitatus · · Score: 1
      Q: What's purple and commutes? A: An Abelian grape.

      Q: What's purple, commutes, and has $N$ worshippers?

      A: A finitely-venerated abelian grape.

      Moooooooooooahahahahah

      --

      Come on, give it up, that's

  23. Re:imagine that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, right, like I can imagine CmdrTaco rejecting a story because he read the math and found the error.

    [CmdrTaco] On page 17 the small thingy is just as big as teh big thingy, but its supposed to a small thingy, so that doesnt work. Next.

  24. Re:imagine that! by idfrsr · · Score: 2, Funny

    Yeah, right, like I can imagine CmdrTaco rejecting a story because he read the math and found the error.

    Actually, the most probable result is that CmdrTaco read the story and didn't find the error, but the error's order of magnitude was too large and so it resulted in a dupe.

    ;)

    --
    "The large print giveth, and the small print taketh away" -Tom Waits
  25. Even more by Ghoser777 · · Score: 1

    And because all the digits are even, no matter what base they were written, you will still have an even number unequal 2, and hence will be not a prime.

    We know that 42 is the answer, but we don't know what the question is. Clearly we haven't found the question yet.

    Matt Fahrenbacher

    --
    James Tiberius Kirk: "Spock, the women on your planet are logical. No other planet in the galaxy can make that claim."
    1. Re:Even more by Nihilanth · · Score: 1

      at the risk of straying offtopic somewhat, I thought the question was "what do you get when you multiply six by nine?", when he pulled the scrabble tiles out of the bag in the third book.

      i interpereted this as a kind of "indirect proof", whereby if you can actually prove that 6x9=42, you can prove literally anything.

    2. Re:Even more by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I took that as meaning that the whole experiment was a flop from all the telephone sanatisers causing the question to be wrong.

    3. Re:Even more by frankie · · Score: 1
      i interpereted this as a kind of "indirect proof", if you can actually prove that 6x9=42

      I interpreted this as implying that the universe was created in Base-13.

  26. Formulajamboree v2.0 (NEW with correct formatting) by AvantLegion · · Score: 0, Troll
    Oh yeah? Well, *I* can prove that women are evil!

    WOMEN = TIME x MONEY (Logical statement that women require time AND money - statement only TRUE when both "time" and "money" are TRUE)
    TIME = MONEY ("Time is Money")
    WOMEN = (MONEY)^2
    MONEY = sqrt(EVIL) ("Money is the Root of all evil)
    WOMEN = (sqrt(EVIL))^2
    WOMEN = EVIL

  27. Re : Necessity of calculating pi? by wass · · Score: 4, Informative
    I can understand calculating pi to the nth point as it is used in calculations

    Even the most precise calculations don't need that many digits of pi. It's amazing how fast orders of magnitude build up.

    Take this extreme example. Suppose you know the radius of the galaxy (define the radius going out to the galactice halo, for instance) to arbitrary precision and your calculation of the circumference is limited only by the precision of pi. If you want to know the circumference town to 10^-15 meters (ie, about the size of an atomic nucleus). How many digits of pi are sufficient?

    The radius of the Milky Way galaxy out to the galactic halo is about 65,000 light years, or about 6e20 meters. Only 36 digits of pi would be necessary!!! And this extreme example is of many orders of magnitude larger than precisions of anything that can be calculated in laboratories today. In actuality, one wouldn't really need more then 12-15 digits of pi, if even that much.

    --

    make world, not war

  28. It's true! by Ghoser777 · · Score: 3, Funny

    2+2 does equal 5, for sufficiently large values of 2.

    I love being a mth dork :)

    Matt Fahrenbacher

    --
    James Tiberius Kirk: "Spock, the women on your planet are logical. No other planet in the galaxy can make that claim."
    1. Re:It's true! by Hognoxious · · Score: 1
      2+2 does equal 5, for sufficiently large values of 2.
      You are mistaken. 2 + 2 = 5 for sufficiently small values of 5.
      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    2. Re:It's true! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2 + 2 = 5 for sufficiently weird definitions of "="

    3. Re:It's true! by stanmann · · Score: 1

      Actually, you are both right and mistaken
      2+2=5 For sufficiently large values of 2 AND sufficiently small values of 5

      Alt

      2+2=5 for Very large values of 2 and extrodinarily small values of 5.

      Also a good test of who in your workplace is truly geeky enough, tell the joke and see who laughs and who gives blank looks.

      --
      Food not Bombs is a nice platitude but it breaks down when you notice that the Bombees are usually well fed
    4. Re:It's true! by Hognoxious · · Score: 1
      Actually, you are both right and mistaken
      Isn't maths brilliant!

      I've heard that circles are hexagonal, for a sufficiently small value of pi...

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  29. The sibling comments are being wiseass. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    If you're so damn good at factoring products of primes, factorise 18446743979220271189!

    1. Re:The sibling comments are being wiseass. by rock_climbing_guy · · Score: 1

      sure

      18446743979220271189! =

      184467439220271189 *
      184467439220271188 *
      184467439220271187 *
      ...
      5 * 4 * 3 * 2

      That was easy!

      --
      Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
    2. Re:The sibling comments are being wiseass. by imyourfoot · · Score: 1

      Lol at the sibling... anyway, the real answer is 4294967279 × 4294967291.

    3. Re:The sibling comments are being wiseass. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you cheat and look at the info page for 'factor' too? Now that's the smart way to solve the problem - RTFM!

    4. Re:The sibling comments are being wiseass. by red_gnom · · Score: 5, Informative
      If you're so damn good at factoring products of primes, factorise 18446743979220271189!

      No sweat: 4294967279 * 4294967291

      Everybody knows, that the best tool for factoring numbers is google:

      http://www.google.ca/search?q=18446743979220271189

  30. IANAMathGeek, but by Rxke · · Score: 2, Insightful

    it's not pointless, that"s why you were modded down. Now don't ask ME what the point is, i really suck in mathematics (but stil love it though) but if you see somewhere the word 'prime', think computer en/decryption, et. c. i even guess it could be used for cancer research....

  31. Re:Formulajamboree v2.0 (NEW with correct formatti by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've always had a problem with this proof, not because it claims that women are evil (which they surely are), but because the correct statement should read

    WOMEN = TIME + MONEY

    since time and money are independent.

  32. What is really important by MrRage · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What would be really important is to prove the Reimann Hypothesis. That would tell us a lot about the distribution of primes.

    1. Re:What is really important by Schreck · · Score: 1

      What would be really important is to prove the Reimann Hypothesis. That would tell us a lot about the distribution of primes.

      Actually that's the Riemann hypothesis, but your mistake seems to be a common misspelling, so don't feel too bad.

      It would be nice to know that the Riemann Hypothesis is true. You see the prime counting function pi(x) (= number of primes less than or equal to x) can be approximated with the integral Li(x) = integral from 0 to x of 1/log(t) dt. The Riemann hypothesis is equivalent to saying that the deviation of pi(x) from Li(x) is O(sqrt(x)log(x)) (that's the big-oh symbol). That is

      pi(x) = Li(x) + O(sqrt(x)log(x)).

      The failure of the Riemann hypothesis would create havoc in the distribution of prime numbers.

    2. Re:What is really important by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks. I'm glad you finally announced what needs to be researched in mathematics. After spending 3 years on this prime shit, I should have known better. The mathematical world needs more visionary people like you.

      Again, thanks man. I owe you one.

  33. Boolean addition versus multiplication by Ghoser777 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If I remember correctly:

    true + true = true
    true + false = true
    false + true = true
    false + false = false

    and

    true x true = true
    true x false = false
    false x true = false
    false x false = false

    Which means that addition is like or'ing booleans together and multiplication is like and'ing booleans together. Therefofore, multiplication would seem to be the correct operation, as women are both time and money, not one or the other.

    QED ;)

    Matt Fahrenbacher

    --
    James Tiberius Kirk: "Spock, the women on your planet are logical. No other planet in the galaxy can make that claim."
    1. Re:Boolean addition versus multiplication by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But if you're going to use boolean operations, you run into a problem when you start taking roots.

    2. Re:Boolean addition versus multiplication by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's try to keep the conversation clean, OK?

    3. Re:Boolean addition versus multiplication by AvantLegion · · Score: 1
      rue + true = true true + false = true false + true = true false + false = false and true x true = true true x false = false false x true = false false x false = false Which means that addition is like or'ing booleans together and multiplication is like and'ing booleans together. Therefofore, multiplication would seem to be the correct operation, as women are both time and money, not one or the other.

      Correct. Which is exactly why I stated that both TIME and MONEY had to be "true" for the whole statement to be true.

  34. cough by bongobongo · · Score: 1

    sorry, slightly off topic.. but after having a bit of a look around here i've concluded that the most popular phrase on slashdot is 'order of magnitude' :x

    1. Re:cough by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 3, Funny
      i've concluded that the most popular phrase on slashdot is 'order of magnitude'

      Yeah, and it's not even close. "order of magnitude" is more popular by a... heck of a lot. (heh.)

    2. Re:cough by fava · · Score: 1

      Actually the most popular phrase on slashdot is:
      n : ???
      (n+1) : Profit!

    3. Re:cough by Carnivorous+Carrot · · Score: 1

      When Natalie Porman's shirt got ripped open in Clones, my penis changed size by an order of magnitude.

      --
      "Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
    4. Re:cough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck! I checked "No Karma Bonus" instead of "Post Anonymously" by accident.

      Pretend that was anonymous.

  35. Not a bad question by Ghoser777 · · Score: 1

    Does anyone know if there are any known benefits to having infinitely many twin primes? Are there any unfinished proofs that depend upon this result or the negation thereof? Not there is anything wrong with researching interesting questions - sometimes seemingly idle questions like these can bring very important results, either from the final conclusion or from the process taken to reach the conclusion.

    Matt Fahrenbacher

    --
    James Tiberius Kirk: "Spock, the women on your planet are logical. No other planet in the galaxy can make that claim."
  36. Re:anyone got some asprin? by commodoresloat · · Score: 3, Funny
    This is slashdot, come on, who cares what the article's about? I rarely understand what's posted on this site, but that doesn't stop me from participating! Hell, I didn't even read the post, much less the article, but based on the title alone there are tons of possible comments to be made about it:
    • insightful conspiracy theories regarding the RIAA planting errors in mathematical proofs in order to foil encryption research
    • pithy but irrelevant quirps about how well linux handles prime numbers compared to windows
    • jokes about how this is really the fault of the Pentium FPU bug
    • tongue twisters and haiku (try saying "twin prime proof error" 10 times fast. and it's exactly 5 syllables!)
    • whines that the site is slashdotted, followed by posts chastising the editors for irresponsibly posting links, which are a direct cause of slashdotting
    • sage comments from wise men with low userids about how this never would have happened if the researchers were doing everything in emacs
  37. Re:Formulajamboree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But sqrt(EVIL^2) is multivalued. It can be EVIL or the complex conjugate of EVIL (EVIL being a complex thing).

  38. They could still pull it out by drdale · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Remember that an error was found when the British mathematician first announced that he had a proof of Fermat's Theorem a few years ago. He was able to fix it, however, and AFAIK his proof is currently considered sound (albeit LONG).

    --
    This post is dedicated to all of those /.ers who do not dedicate their posts to themselves.
    1. Re:They could still pull it out by jkauzlar · · Score: 1

      Is this Andrew Wiles' proof or did somebody else prove it?

    2. Re:They could still pull it out by drdale · · Score: 1

      Yes, that's right, although I wouldn't have remembered the name on my own. I read a short interview with him where he said it would take about two months for a professional mathematician to understand the error, it was so subtle.

      --
      This post is dedicated to all of those /.ers who do not dedicate their posts to themselves.
  39. I found the proof... by Ridge · · Score: 4, Funny

    It was in here.

    Unfortunately, I devoured it. Damn you Bill Cosby!

    1. Re:I found the proof... by Paleomacus · · Score: 1

      I wonder if anyone got the same kick that I did out of that url.
      In the query string 'jlo_family_pudding'

    2. Re:I found the proof... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      there's always room for jlo!

  40. The Slashdot Lame Joke Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps all of the overwhelmingly humorous Slashdotters were also involved. All the laughter from your joke must have caused folks to spit all over their keyboard. In the process of cleaning up, they probably hit the reload button several times, tragically ruining the website. If you would kindly discontiue this, we will not have any future problems.

  41. Re:predicted posts to this article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So among the nearly 700,000 Slashdot users, you can confirm that ... Oh you didn't say he has an account. You can confirm that of the million page views per day, one might possibly be from your Math Professor? That's nice. Obviously Slashdot has a much bigger Math following then previously thought. Hopefully math.slashdot.org will start up soon. Maybe they can come up with an even more offensive color scheme than games.slashdot.org.

  42. Re:anyone got some asprin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "someone explain for us burnt out hippies please!"

    read: someone explain for taco, michael, and chris, please.

  43. Re:anyone got some asprin? by heymjo · · Score: 1

    lol :) but oh so true... Just ran out of modpoints, too bad

  44. How to be a threat to national security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here I'll Show you how to factor 27159925611 into its primes
    Just keep dividing by primes untill you get one that your number is divisible by

    3
    27159925611< 7
    9053308537< 13
    1293329791<
    99486907
    The result is a factor tree made of all primes, just like the ones you(or I at least) made in junior high

    1. Re:How to be a threat to national security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      You fucking idiot. You have no fucking clue do you? The problem with such exhaustive methods (which is the only possible type of method available), is that with very large numbers with very large factors take an *extremely* long time to factor. This is what everyone has been talking about, though you seemed to have missed the point.

      see: here for proving primality and

      here for some other interesting facts about primes.

      Why do I point you to pages about primes, when you're talking about factoring? Well, the tests for primality and the tests for factors happen to be contrapositives, and so a particular test will find both--though certain properties about primes allow short-cuts that factoring won't allow.

  45. surely, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you can derive it from scratch for us...

  46. Art, not engineering by foo+fighter · · Score: 1

    I consider math at this level to be more like art and less like engineering.

    You do it because the problem is beautiful and the solution is likely to be beautiful. If you are lucky the solution will turn out to be not only beautiful but also make a statement about life (or some aspect of life).

    --
    obviously no deficiencies vs. no obvious deficiencies
  47. I still wouldn't mind... by xaoslaad · · Score: 2, Funny

    I still wouldn't mind these guys helping me understand my calculus homework...

    1. Re:I still wouldn't mind... by Paleomacus · · Score: 2, Funny

      I would much rather have them DO my calculus homework.

  48. Re:predicted posts to this article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    djb has an account. I know of at least one other mathematician with an account. But so what. The twin prime conjecture is not exactly motivic cohomology man. It was explained in a movie with that actress/singer with the big nose... I forget her name. It is a commonly known problem outside of mathematics, that is why it is news. Look at the press coverage that the FLT proof got, and yet the vast majority of the people who heard about it have no hope of ever understanding it. It is rather obvious that the vast majority of Slashdot users are complete morons. If you look at just about any article posted of a technical nature, most of the posts are either off topic, asking very basic questions about the topic, or explaining very basic concepts related to the topic. This is the problem that moderation was supposed to address, but it didn't work.

  49. 2+2=3 by Ann+Coulter · · Score: 1

    from the 2+2=5 dept

    Step 1: -1/1 = 1/-1
    Step 2: Taking the square root of both sides:
    Step 3: Simplifying:
    Step 4: In other words, i/1 = 1/i.
    Step 5: Therefore, i / 2 = 1 / (2i),
    Step 6: i/2 + 3/(2i) = 1/(2i) + 3/(2i),
    Step 7: i (i/2 + 3/(2i) ) = i ( 1/(2i) + 3/(2i) ),
    Step 8: ,
    Step 9: (-1)/2 + 3/2 = 1/2 + 3/2,
    Step 10: and this shows that 1=2.

    therefore 2+2=1+1=3; QED

    Thanks for the proof

    1. Re:2+2=3 by FuriousBroccoli · · Score: 1

      The square root of 1/-1 is equal to the square root of -1/1 which is equal to i, not 1/i. Those crazy Canucks.

    2. Re:2+2=3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      -1 has two square roots, i and -i, since i^2 = (-i)^2 = -1

      1/i = 1*i / i*i = i / (-1) = -i

      So, 1/i is "a" (not "the") square root of -1.
      Nothing wrong with that.

      Euler solved the confusion you have by using i instead of "square root symbol -1" in 1748.

      Let's translate this problem into real numbers, then you can see what's wrong:

      4 = 4
      square root (4) = square root (4)
      -2 = 2

      Now it sounds even more stupid, but it is in fact what they do in this proof.

    3. Re:2+2=3 by CTalkobt · · Score: 1
      In other news, 0.999 repeating = 1.0

      1/9 = .11111111 repeating

      * 9 *9

      ---- ----------

      9/9 = .99999999999 repeating

      1 = .99999 repeating

      Granted, the parent post isn't true while mine is but this is cool to show to people who aren't that math knowledgable. Had some guy looking at it for 2 hours trying to find the problem in it.

      --
      There's a gorilla from Manilla whose a fella that stinks of vanilla and has salmonella.
    4. Re:2+2=3 by Debillitatus · · Score: 1

      Actually, that proof is correct. What's your beef?

      --

      Come on, give it up, that's

    5. Re:2+2=3 by damiam · · Score: 1
      The flaw is in the "simplifying" step, which you don't even show, so of course no one will see the fallacy.

      In case anyone was wondering, the flaw is in saying that if sqrt(-1/1) = sqrt(1/-1), then (sqrt -1) / (sqrt 1) = (sqrt 1) / (sqrt -1). That only works when all numbers under the radical are positive.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
  50. Did I miss something? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Didn't the original proof say that there was no limit to the closeness of primes, rather than saying explicitly that twin primes exist to infinity? If I'm right, then it implies that there COULD be an infinite number of twin primes, but it doesn't mean there has to be.

  51. Missed one by Skevin · · Score: 1

    An (American) Indian chief has three wives, all of them pregnant. One day, the village shaman prophesizes that all three women will not only give birth on the same day, but within the same hour! He then goes on to prepare a teepee with three animal skins: a deer, a bear, and a hippopotamus.

    Well, the special day finally arrives when all three women go into labor. The shaman directs them to go to the specially prepared tent and each lie down on one of the animal skins.

    The woman on the deer skin gives birth first, delivering a 7-pound baby boy.

    The woman on the bear skin is next, birthing an 8-pound boy.

    However, the woman on the hippopotamus skin, after extensive labor, pops out a 15-pound baby.

    What's the moral of this story?

    "The son of the squaw of the hippopotamus is equivalent to the sons of the squaws of the other two hides!"

    [groan]

    --
    "Twice half-assed makes an ass whole." --Solomon K. Chang
    1. Re:Missed one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That might have been funny if the numbers actually validated the Pythagoras's Theorem.

      6 , 8, and 10 pound babies?

      ...nevermind, still kind of lame.

    2. Re:Missed one by TheSilentGuy · · Score: 1

      Actually, his version was right and your version was wrong because in his twisted version of the Pythagoras' Theorem there are no squares but only squaws ;)

      --
      I used to be schizophrenic be we are all right now
  52. Re:Idea may lead to new record, not twin prime pro by cruppel · · Score: 1

    I am definitely not flaming Dominic the poster, but if all the moderators that read this post understood it then I'd be real freakin' suprised. "Oh look! symbols! [+1 Informative]

  53. Damn it! by 1nv4d3r · · Score: 3, Funny

    Fuck! <> Back to my job at the gas station, I guess....

  54. Didn't you read Contact. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We calculate PI to the gazillionth diget to see the pictures put there (as a long string of zeros and ones) by a super advanced intellegence.

  55. Re:Idea may lead to new record, not twin prime pro by Dominic_Mazzoni · · Score: 1

    I am definitely not flaming Dominic the poster, but if all the moderators that read this post understood it then I'd be real freakin' suprised. "Oh look! symbols! [+1 Informative]

    No offense taken! :)

  56. You suck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Didn't you read the article, you idiot?

  57. The Riemann hypothesis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is a nice distributed calculus that is trying to prove the Riemann hypothesis, it needs your spare cpu cicles for it.

    If you can help, and maybe win the 1 million dollar price, take a look at www.zetagrid.net.

    Alex

  58. What the hell is wrong with you? by jkauzlar · · Score: 1

    You disgrace us all!

    1. Re:What the hell is wrong with you? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's with all the losers in this thread?

  59. a historically accurate version by mandalayx · · Score: 1

    I have a truly wonderful proof of this fact...

    but this margin is too small to contain it.

  60. well by SweetAndSourJesus · · Score: 1

    The rest of the human race exists only to serve my needs. If you can't in some way make my life better, then please die, as you are only consuming resources that may possibly be of utility to me.

    Pardon my honesty, good sir.

    --

    --
    the strongest word is still the word "free"
  61. MOD PARENT UP! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    +1 Right Fucking On!

  62. Re:Idea may lead to new record, not twin prime pro by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 1

    ...twin prime conjecture will ever be proved using this method, but there's still a pretty reasonable chance that the proof will result in something along the lines that there are infinitely many pairs of consecutive primes that differ only by x,...

    Uh, yeah. So are my GPG keys safe or what?

  63. Re:Formulajamboree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yeah, i think we all agree that women are the complex variant of evil...

  64. Re:Formulajamboree v2.0 (NEW with correct formatti by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    WOMEN = (sqrt(EVIL))^2
    WOMEN = EVIL
    Ah, there's the error in the proof. It can also be the case that WOMEN = - EVIL

    Since we're doing the "boolean" thing here, I guess this means that WOMEN can be NOT EVIL.

  65. since no one else said it... by balaam's+ass · · Score: 1

    Looks like their theorem is "not ready for prime time!"

  66. You are all fukking idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go suck a penis fagz