/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12068272
>If your new numbers don't follow the same arithmetic rules then literally all of the work preceding the Riemann Hypothesis would be invalid for your numbers.
Luckily for me then, my construction of R does not overturn any of the classical rules of arithmetic. All of the usual rules fall out of my axioms in the limit of vanishing big parts.

>say nothing about the function itself.
It literally says where the function is equal to zero. Also, if "meaningless" results are to be discounted then we can ignore 99.99% of the math paper that get published. I think you mean, "This isn't the most important math paper of the last 100 years." I don't know if it is or if it isn't. If someone parlays my result in a prime factorization shortcut, pic related, then it is the most important.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Ie00tGi_io&t=55

>>12068284
I wrote about it in here:
https://gofile.io/d/FqbLXa