Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Topic: Vindication of Goldbach's conjecture
Replies: 74   Last Post: Aug 9, 2012 6:50 PM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 Michael Stemper Posts: 671 Registered: 6/26/08
Re: Vindication of Goldbach's conjecture
Posted: Jun 25, 2012 12:48 PM

In article <bf3323b9-6c3e-43e8-a01f-cee5b6c3e55e@m10g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>, mluttgens <luttgma@gmail.com> writes:
>On 22 juin, 13:05, Gus Gassmann <horand.gassm...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> On Jun 22, 7:40=A0am, mluttgens <lutt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On 22 juin, 03:19, Gus Gassmann <horand.gassm...@googlemail.com> wrote:

>> > exact value 10804.
>> > With the help of a graph, one could infer that another relationship,
>> > probably exponential, would be more appropriate. This would of course
>> > still clearer vindicate Goldbach's conjecture.

>>
>> You chose not to respond to my main substantive point, which was that
>> vindication =/= proof. Evidence in favor of the conjecture is hardly
>> news. After all, the original conjecture was based on at least some
>> evidence, so you are approximately 270 years too late. And since n(N),
>> the number of ways one can partition N into primes, is not monotonic*,
>> you cannot rule out a situation where N > 2 and n(N) = 0.
>>
>> * n(8) = n(12) = 1, but n(10) = 2.

>
>And n(38) = 3, but you cannot find an even number N such as n(N) = 0!

Prove it.

>meaning of proof.

Because you don't have anything vaguely resembling a proof, all you
have are the same observations that led to the conjecture being made.

>During those 270 years, nobody tried to correlate log N with log n.

Others have already pointed out that this is incorrect.

>If I had big computing power, I'd try numbers N =3D
>10^2, 10^3, etc... till for instance 10^15, and determine more
>precisely the
>If such curve confirms the positive correlation I found, it would not
>only vindicate,
>but also *prove* the validity of Goldbach's conjecture.

No it wouldn't. "Correlation" isn't enough for proof, now matter how
far one carries the correlation.

--
Michael F. Stemper
#include <Standard_Disclaimer>
Life's too important to take seriously.

Date Subject Author
6/6/12 mluttgens
6/6/12 Brian Q. Hutchings
6/6/12 GEIvey
6/7/12 Richard Tobin
6/8/12 mluttgens
6/8/12 Count Dracula
6/9/12 mluttgens
6/9/12 Brian Q. Hutchings
6/9/12 mluttgens
6/25/12 GEIvey
6/9/12 Richard Tobin
6/9/12 mluttgens
6/9/12 Richard Tobin
6/9/12 Brian Q. Hutchings
6/9/12 Brian Q. Hutchings
6/14/12 mluttgens
6/16/12 mluttgens
6/16/12 Frederick Williams
6/20/12 mluttgens
6/20/12 Rick Decker
6/21/12 mluttgens
6/21/12 Frederick Williams
6/21/12 mluttgens
6/22/12 mluttgens
6/22/12 mluttgens
6/22/12 Brian Q. Hutchings
6/25/12 Michael Stemper
6/26/12 mluttgens
6/26/12 Frederick Williams
6/28/12 Michael Stemper
7/19/12 mluttgens
7/19/12 Timothy Murphy
7/19/12 mluttgens
7/19/12 Gus Gassmann
7/20/12 mluttgens
8/1/12 Tim Little
8/4/12 mluttgens
8/4/12 Frederick Williams
8/6/12 mluttgens
8/6/12 gus gassmann
8/6/12 Brian Q. Hutchings
8/9/12 Pubkeybreaker
7/19/12 J. Antonio Perez M.
7/20/12 mluttgens
6/25/12 Michael Stemper
6/25/12 Thomas Nordhaus
6/17/12 mluttgens
6/17/12 quasi
6/18/12 Count Dracula
6/18/12 quasi
6/19/12 Count Dracula
6/19/12 quasi
6/20/12 mluttgens
6/22/12 Michael Stemper
6/22/12 mluttgens
6/22/12 Robin Chapman
6/22/12 Michael Stemper
6/23/12 mluttgens
6/22/12 Richard Tobin
6/22/12 Richard Tobin
6/25/12 Richard Tobin
6/25/12 Michael Stemper
6/14/12 Count Dracula
6/21/12 Luis A. Rodriguez
6/21/12 Brian Q. Hutchings
6/21/12 mluttgens
6/25/12 GEIvey
6/20/12 J. Antonio Perez M.