# Re: Direct calculation of Primes - Possible?

*From*: dave <daf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>*Date*: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 21:39:39 -0500

Chris Mattern <syscjm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

In article <jeqdnb5oeuFOyZnbnZ2dnUVZ_g-dnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxx>, dave wrote:

Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:It is rather difficult to tell; you could work on your coherency.

On 2007-03-23, Nick Maclaren <nmm1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Whether nor not your postings are an act, please stop posting idiocy.

Okay, enough people have debunked Dave's claims; can we please

What *is* my claim?

It appears to be that this kook's unrevealed and unreviewed work

is worth anybody's time, when it is in fact only a step removed

from Jumbo Cosmospheres.

Your statement of the purpose of my original post is not too

far off the mark. But it is clear that no one posting to this thread

(besides myself) has any interest in actually checking out the proof.

So be it.

.

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: Direct calculation of Primes - Possible?***From:*SSMelaNB

**References**:**Direct calculation of Primes - Possible?***From:*dave

**Re: Direct calculation of Primes - Possible?***From:*Nick Maclaren

**Re: Direct calculation of Primes - Possible?***From:*Unruh

**Re: Direct calculation of Primes - Possible?***From:*dave

**Re: Direct calculation of Primes - Possible?***From:*Marc Espie

**Re: Direct calculation of Primes - Possible?***From:*dave

**Re: Direct calculation of Primes - Possible?***From:*Nick Maclaren

**Re: Direct calculation of Primes - Possible?***From:*Keith Keller

**Re: Direct calculation of Primes - Possible?***From:*dave

**Re: Direct calculation of Primes - Possible?***From:*Chris Mattern

- Prev by Date:
**Re: Direct calculation of Primes - Possible?** - Next by Date:
**Re: Direct calculation of Primes - Possible?** - Previous by thread:
**Re: Direct calculation of Primes - Possible?** - Next by thread:
**Re: Direct calculation of Primes - Possible?** - Index(es):