On May 9, 2013, hope...@frontier.com wrote: > The thousand years of so called Parade of Mathematics is all over with the upcoming final publication of precise predictive spirals of prime numbers around a half line thatmodulates the Conal Progression at 1:3. > > > > It is made Possible by the sole Grace to me of JESUS CHRIST MY LORD, and the inspiration of a few mathematicians , specially the inspiration of a friend, a Phd , Belel Mohammed Bathia PHD, Mathematics, Malaysia, who understood my papers and published them in a journal recognized by the American Mathematical Society ( International journal of applied mathematical research, IJAMR). The mathematcs is beyond Cambridge , beyond Princeton, beyond Harvard, beyond all the current melee of mathematiccs and thier entourage of mathematicians, because for the first time in the history the placement of numbers ( not thier innate value alone) is defined by prime numbers > > > > The mathematics will be duly completed at, the authors liesure , but it is set for publication shortly to record it into posterity . The basic series for spiral 18 and 20 are. These are infinite precise rolls, precise in all ways > > > > 19 29 37 > > 23 31 41 > > 41 47 59 > > 43 53 61 > > 53 61 71 > > 61 71 79 > > 71 79 89 > > 89 101 107 > > 149 157 167 > > 163 173 181 > > 179 191 197 > > 181 193 199 > > 263 271 281 > > 449 461 467 > > > > > > > > Spiral at half-line value 20: It?s precise at 20, all ways like the 18 above. > > > > 47 59 67 > > 83 97 103 > > 137 149 157 > > 173 181 193 > > 251 263 271 > > 369 379 389 > > 443 447 453 > > 593 601 613 > > > > > > Vinoo Cameron
According the the editorial policies of the IJAMR, "Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable."
1. This may be original research, I give you this.
2. I don't see any objective discussion of its significance. Your motto : you are right, mathematics is flawed and mathematicians are evil. Where is the objectivity in this kind of arguments?
3. There is no way to replicate your work since you use your own concepts without giving any clue on how they work. All I see is a bunch of numbers. And we are suppose to follow you blindly because you had a divine influence for this work?
4. I can't say that your work is inaccurate, but I can't say it's accurate.
Knowing tha IJAMR is a peer-reviewed journal, I can't imagine that a referee would accept such crap for 100 euros. Total nonsense.
Being published doesn't mean that your research is legitimate. It only means that a referee has been unable to understand your research and agreed to publish it.