On Thu, 16 May 2013 16:31:20 -0700 (PDT), Pubkeybreaker wrote:
>On May 16, 12:03 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote: >> First Proof That Infinitely Many Prime Numbers Come in Pairs >> >> >> >> >http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=first-proof-that-inf... >> > That goal is the proof to a conjecture concerning prime numbers. >> > Those are the whole numbers that are divisible only by one and >> > themselves. Primes abound among smaller numbers, but they become less >> > and less frequent as one goes towards larger numbers. In fact, the >> > gap between each prime and the next becomes larger and larger -- on >> > average. But exceptions exist: the 'twin primes', which are pairs of >> > prime numbers that differ in value by 2. Examples of known twin >> > primes are 3 and 5, or 17 and 19, or 2,003,663,613 × 2^195,000 - 1 and >> > 2,003,663,613 × 2^195,000 + 1. >> >> > The twin prime conjecture says that there is an infinite number of >> > such twin pairs. Some attribute the conjecture to the Greek >> > mathematician Euclid of Alexandria, which would make it one of the >> > oldest open problems in mathematics.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > >This is a gross misstatement of the proof.
A gross misstatement by Sam? Really?!
Oh ... I guess not.
He didn't actually write what he posted.
Maybe he'll want to take credit for vetting it ... or not.