# Re: Proof of fraud, flawed number theory still taught

*From*: David Eather <eather@xxxxxxxxxx>*Date*: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 05:57:54 +1000

`jstevh@xxxxxxx wrote:`

Some years ago I figured out a new technique in algebraic analysis. The techniques I developed were developed by me to try to prove Fermat's Last Theorem and I didn't realize that I'd stumbled across proof of this massive error in the number theory field, though as people argued and argued with me, I figured that out and came to understand just how massive it was.

The gist of it is that I've found a flaw that takes out just about the entire field of modern number theory.

Since I claim to have the correct mathematics it's just common sense that if I am right then my research results show what the flawed number theory cannot.

Quite simply, with my mathematical ideas that actually work, I can make predictions in number theory which are absolutely perfect, where the flawed number theory is useless or wrong.

I did so years ago. No one has shown me wrong, but it's easy to do so if I am, so I thought I'd remind you of how easy it is, in case some of you are suffering under the delusion that you are actually highly intelligent and using correct mathematics, when in fact, you are part of a group that is deliberately refusing to use correct mathematics.

My theories show that given

a^3 + 3(-1+xf^2)a^2 - f^2(x^3 f^4 - 3x^2 f^2 + 3x) = 0

with non-zero non-unit integer f and non-zero integer x coprime to f, it must be true that only two of the roots of the resulting cubic have f as a factor, while one is coprime to f.

For example, with x=1 and f=7 you get the result

a^3 + 144a^2 - 110593 = 0

and that cubic's roots must follow my theory in that only two have 7 as a factor while one is coprime to 7, though not in the ring of algebraic integers.

That theory works without regard to whether or not the roots are rational or irrational, which is why my ideas are easily testable, as if I'm wrong, it's just a matter of finding an f and x where you get a rational root and it doesn't fit with my predictions.

It needs to be a rational solution as it is easy to prove as I have that it does not matter what is true in the ring of algebraic integers, so claims that my work is refuted by irrationals that do not have f as a factor in the ring of algebraic integers are specious.

That is, posters are then relying on the very flaw I've outlined to try and attack my work, which is the kind of stupid crap that has worked for years to my amazement.

So RATIONAL solutions are key here.

So you could use some math software, write a script and let your computer crunch for a while finding f's and x's where you get a cubic with a rational solution or more than one rational solution and see if that solution has f as a factor or is coprime to f.

If in a single instance it is not, then I am wrong.

But I know what the math shows so you will not find that single instance, but you may find people who will reject hundreds or hundreds of thousands of cases proving I'm right because they themselves are the problem--they don't care about what's true.

But for some of you, a hundred thousand or more cases showing I'm right with none showing I'm wrong will mean something, I hope.

Remember, it only takes ONE case to show I'm wrong.

That way to refute my work has been around for years. Posters shy away from it. People criticizing me make damn sure not to talk about it, and people have lied about it, as it's a test they can't win.

After all, it's mathematics. What's true is absolutely true. Since I am absolutely correct, going to an area where the math behaves perfectly as I say it does is just a way to lose a social battle, where people arguing with me, so far, have won, by keeping it social and hiding from the truth.

I like sci.crypt for this post as you guys are a little more no-nonsense and of course you do use number theory, a lot of which does work, but if you have used some of the supposedly advanced number theory and been baffled by it not working as you'd thought it should, then now you can find out why--it's wrong.

The test is an easy one, but I'm sure posters will reply to this with more social crap and distractions as they've done--quite successfully--for years.

But maybe some of you will get out your math software and run the scripts and post the truth. And maybe, it will mean something to somebody who actually cares about correct mathematics.

Math professors keep teaching the wrong ideas despite my having proven them wrong years ago, in what I see as an expression of contempt for their students and their society. I keep wondering why, but all I can see is that some people despise the truth--when it hurts their bottom line.

So for a math professor, what price their student's minds? Seems to be a few years salary waiting until I forced the issue, which is rather cheap to me.

But that's the choice they made.

James Harris

Being that this has nothing to do with cryptology how about taking sci.crypt off the list of recipients?

.

Being that this has nothing to do with cryptology how about taking sci.crypt off the list of recipients?

.

**Follow-Ups**:

- Prev by Date:
**Re: How this algorithm of prime factor decomposition works?** - Next by Date:
**Re: Comparison** - Previous by thread:
**Re: I need some help.** - Next by thread:
**Re: Proof of fraud, flawed number theory still taught** - Index(es):