yeah, its right on mathworld's front page. http://mathworld.com its the 3rd story on the bottom:
The 2004 Wolfram Technology Conference invites authors, students, educators, and developers who use Mathematica and other Wolfram products to participate. This year's conference will include contributed talks, a new student presentation forum, an art gallery, tutorials, hands-on workshops, and problem-solving clinics.
Twin Prime Proof Proffered
A May 26 preprint by Vanderbilt University mathematician R. F. Arenstorf appears to come close to settling the long-standing question of the infinitude of twin primes. While a hole has recently been found in the proof, mathematicians remain hopeful that the proof can be corrected.
Riemann Hypothesis "Proof" Much Ado About Nothing
A June 8 Purdue University news release reports a proof of the Riemann Hypothesis by L. de Branges. However, both the 23-page preprint (from 2003) cited in the original release and a 124-page preprint (from 2004) cited in a back-dated modified release seem to lack an actual proof. Furthermore, a counterexample to de Branges's approach by Conrey and Li has been known since 1998. The media coverage therefore appears to be much ado about nothing.
I don't really mean to completely insult his proof of the BIerbach conjecture, it is just that simplifications came so much sooner after his proof than normally come, at least that is what I have been lead to believe while I could be wrong, My main point is that he is pretty much an asshole. He holds a seminar which is supposedly open to the public, and Kicks out pretty much anyone he doesn't think is advanced enough.
I am going to go to his seminar tomorrow morning, just to confirm that he is indeed an asshole. Please email me with any thoughts on this.
agentpi@mac.com
I go to Purdue, and de Branges is unable to explain himself at all. He has attempted to explain his process to other professors at a seminar here, and has only confused them. He also kicked first year grad students out of his seminar, stating they were to inexperienced.
From these grad students, I have learned that he is pretty much and hotshot and an asshole. I'm thinking about going to his seminar on wednesday just to see how long it takes him to kick me out. (I'm a first year undergraduate).
A note about his proof of the Bieberbach Conjecture. While de Branges did prove the conjecture, he overcomplicated it, as he does many things, and everybody and their thesis advisor has simplified his proof in some way. Mathworld really discredits his "proof" for one, it contains no proof, and his method was proven flawed by counterexample in 1998.
That reminds me of something I saw on TV about a trucker that got scammed by a 14 year old on ebay. The trucker sent a pipe bomb to the kid by UPS from an non-existant address. The kid died from the explosion, and he was eventually caught, because Windows didn't delete the address label he made.
The lesson here, don't scam on ebay, because the crazy trucker you scam, could have a mac.
I guess they discovered a new "feature' to Windows.
It is possible however that the information they are speaking of is not completely under their control, but perhaps under the control of another party against the release of the requested information.
But I think it is more logical that the government has a special build of windows that destroys everything if anything is copied. This is not a bug, its a feature!
John Nash states that the Riemann Hyopothesis drove him to his extreme problems with schizophrenia, perhaps the Holy Grail of Pure Mathematics has taken another victim to the edge of insanity and beyond.
I am reminded of the sage advices of my Calculus teacher, Mr. Jack Albers:
"Don't let yourself be victimized by the problem!"
Slashdot Mirror
thanks, I am an idiot
...It did, YAY!!!!!
I hope this worked.....
Thanks anonymous coward, I didn't notice that you posted so my reply is long and redundant, but you said it well!
How do you split comments into different blocks, the obvious answer doesn't work! maybe its a problem with Safari.
yeah, its right on mathworld's front page. http://mathworld.com its the 3rd story on the bottom: The 2004 Wolfram Technology Conference invites authors, students, educators, and developers who use Mathematica and other Wolfram products to participate. This year's conference will include contributed talks, a new student presentation forum, an art gallery, tutorials, hands-on workshops, and problem-solving clinics. Twin Prime Proof Proffered A May 26 preprint by Vanderbilt University mathematician R. F. Arenstorf appears to come close to settling the long-standing question of the infinitude of twin primes. While a hole has recently been found in the proof, mathematicians remain hopeful that the proof can be corrected. Riemann Hypothesis "Proof" Much Ado About Nothing A June 8 Purdue University news release reports a proof of the Riemann Hypothesis by L. de Branges. However, both the 23-page preprint (from 2003) cited in the original release and a 124-page preprint (from 2004) cited in a back-dated modified release seem to lack an actual proof. Furthermore, a counterexample to de Branges's approach by Conrey and Li has been known since 1998. The media coverage therefore appears to be much ado about nothing. I don't really mean to completely insult his proof of the BIerbach conjecture, it is just that simplifications came so much sooner after his proof than normally come, at least that is what I have been lead to believe while I could be wrong, My main point is that he is pretty much an asshole. He holds a seminar which is supposedly open to the public, and Kicks out pretty much anyone he doesn't think is advanced enough. I am going to go to his seminar tomorrow morning, just to confirm that he is indeed an asshole. Please email me with any thoughts on this. agentpi@mac.com
I go to Purdue, and de Branges is unable to explain himself at all. He has attempted to explain his process to other professors at a seminar here, and has only confused them. He also kicked first year grad students out of his seminar, stating they were to inexperienced. From these grad students, I have learned that he is pretty much and hotshot and an asshole. I'm thinking about going to his seminar on wednesday just to see how long it takes him to kick me out. (I'm a first year undergraduate). A note about his proof of the Bieberbach Conjecture. While de Branges did prove the conjecture, he overcomplicated it, as he does many things, and everybody and their thesis advisor has simplified his proof in some way. Mathworld really discredits his "proof" for one, it contains no proof, and his method was proven flawed by counterexample in 1998.
That reminds me of something I saw on TV about a trucker that got scammed by a 14 year old on ebay. The trucker sent a pipe bomb to the kid by UPS from an non-existant address. The kid died from the explosion, and he was eventually caught, because Windows didn't delete the address label he made. The lesson here, don't scam on ebay, because the crazy trucker you scam, could have a mac.
I guess they discovered a new "feature' to Windows. It is possible however that the information they are speaking of is not completely under their control, but perhaps under the control of another party against the release of the requested information. But I think it is more logical that the government has a special build of windows that destroys everything if anything is copied. This is not a bug, its a feature!
John Nash states that the Riemann Hyopothesis drove him to his extreme problems with schizophrenia, perhaps the Holy Grail of Pure Mathematics has taken another victim to the edge of insanity and beyond. I am reminded of the sage advices of my Calculus teacher, Mr. Jack Albers: "Don't let yourself be victimized by the problem!"