Re: JSH: Common sense
jstevh_at_msn.com
Date: 04/19/05
- Next message: rowlek: "Re: Difficulties interpreting Results of a Friedman-Test"
- Previous message: Roger Schlafly: "Re: Authentication before encryption or ...?"
- In reply to: stush_at_rocketmail.com: "Re: JSH: Common sense"
- Next in thread: Rick Decker: "Re: JSH: Common sense"
- Reply: Rick Decker: "Re: JSH: Common sense"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: 19 Apr 2005 14:50:18 -0700
stush@rocketmail.com wrote:
> jst...@msn.com wrote:
> > If someone just steps up to the plate and can show that I'm wrong
> > versus arguing with me about infinity then, hey, I just go back to
> > bugging sci.math about the problem with algebraic integers or my
> prime
> > counting function.
>
> But you are right. If you iterate over an infinite set of rational
> inputs, SFT will produce an infinite number of non-trival factors as
> outputs.
>
> What are people missing?
Oh, the theorem isn't really all that difficult, and it's not possible
for it to lean towards one type of factor or another, so what's
happening is one of those interesting things where people trapped
against an absolute truth, just deny.
I think it's interesting.
It's a lot more interesting than solving the factoring problem.
James Harris
- Next message: rowlek: "Re: Difficulties interpreting Results of a Friedman-Test"
- Previous message: Roger Schlafly: "Re: Authentication before encryption or ...?"
- In reply to: stush_at_rocketmail.com: "Re: JSH: Common sense"
- Next in thread: Rick Decker: "Re: JSH: Common sense"
- Reply: Rick Decker: "Re: JSH: Common sense"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
