Re: Critiquing surrogate factoring

From: Randy Howard (randyhoward_at_FOOverizonBAR.net)
Date: 03/31/05 

Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 08:34:41 GMT

In article <1112185254.179615.166250@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
jstevh@msn.com says...
> Previously I was brainstorming--working to generate LOTS of new ideas
> that I expected might not stand up to serious scrutiny.

Apparently, one of the few times that your expectations were actually
fulfilled.

> Now theorems have a special place in mathematics as they are statements
> that can be proven.

I note that you do not have a special place in mathematics, unless it
is the potential for you and "surrogate factoring" to be made famous
in a future Dilbert cartoon sequence focused on the topic of Usenet
trolls.

> I want to discuss the surrogate factoring theorem, which is itself,
> independent of practical questions like, does it work?

Yes, we are well aware that you studiously avoid any and all
questions about that particularly inconvenient questions.

> The theorem itself, without regard to the efficacy of algorithms, must
> be true, or it's not a theorem.

Then it must not be one. LOL 

-- 
Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR)
"Making it hard to do stupid things often makes it hard
 to do smart ones too." -- Andrew Koenig

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Mussina: quote of the year
    ... with the big bucks comes the big expectations and big scrutiny. ... Well said, Raymond. ...
    (alt.sports.baseball.ny-yankees)
  • Re: Mussina: quote of the year
    ... money ever that is a legit point. ... with the big bucks comes the big expectations and big scrutiny. ...
    (alt.sports.baseball.ny-yankees)