/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8627942
XD
epbin trole

>>8627942

3 = 1 x 2

>>8627942
bait !== fish

I for one welcome these kind of light-hearted japes.

>>8627942
>>8627956
>Enumerating all the way to [math] 10^ { 200 } [/math]

Lol, good luck.

>>8627942
easy, suppose the proposition expressed by the goldbach conjecture is represented by [math]G[/math]

Suppose we have the sum:

[math]S = 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + ... [/math]

Let [math]P[/math] be the proposition that [math]S < 0 [/math], by knowledge of ancient mathematics, [math]S = \frac{-1}{12} < 0 [/math], therefore [math]P [/math] is true.

But, since [math]b > 0 \Rightarrow a + b > a [/math], so, since [math]n \in \mathbb{N} \Rightarrow n > 0 [/math], we have [math]S > 1 > 0 [/math], so we have: [math]S > 0[/math], so we have [math] \lnot P [/math].

now, we proceed by tableau proof:

[math]P = (S < 0) [/math]
[math]G = \text{Goldbach conjecture}[/math]

[math](1) P \land \lnot P \ \ \text{(theorem)\text} [/math]
[math](2) P \ \ (1 \land - \text{elimination}) [/math]
[math](3) \lnot P \ \ (1 \land - \text{elimination}) [/math]
[math](4) P \lor G \ \ (2 \lor - \text{introduction}) [/math]
[math](5)G \ \ (3, 4 \lor - \text{syllogism}) [/math]

Ergo, [math]G [/math] is a theorem, therefore the Goldbach conjecture is true

>>8628021
>Assuming 10^200 is the largest number
>Then no natural number exists
>Goldbach conjecture proved vacuously.

>>8628442
>Assuming 10^200 is the largest number
>he doesn't know
lmaoing @ ur life

>>8628445
>Trying to help continue your shitty meme.
>Gets mocked

Fuck you, your meme is dropped bitch.

>>8628021

Well not with THAT attitude!

Can't solve the Goldbach conjecture, but p = np when n = 1 and/or p = 0.

>>8627942
How come it's so difficult to prove such a silly conjecture?
Looks like there's something wrong or incomplete about number theory.
Someone explain.

8 = 4+4

Gee, that was hard!

>>8628484
you're like that guy who repeats a joke after somebody else has said it a few moments earlier

>>8627942
Could this be one of those unprovable arithmetic truths that Godel's Meme Theorem warned me about?

>>8628484

p = np

p/p = np/p

n = 1

p = (1)p

QED

>>8627942
Natural numbers only follow the rule "+1."
Nothing about 7+1=8 is similar to 2x4.
There is nothing that suggests there must be a relationship between the concept of prime and decimal numbers. Anyone try primes in other bases?
Certainly the conjecture is not a rule for all numbers (odd) are not included.
Even the concept of having a result of 0 is crazy. Perhaps it should be undefined or unknown.
If 0d points x infinity = 1 then 1/0 = infinity rather than undefined.
I think we need to question the basic premises of math rather than complicate things.

>>8627942
Let me try

> If math is just an a way to express something through numbers, than math = equal to logic = equal to words

There is 1 glowing sphere on a vantablack surface. I give 1 glowing sphere 1 cut trough the middle and place both with the round side up on the vantablack surface. 1×1=2

>>8628663
I thought primes were the same across bases?

>>8629916
yes, prime is a property of the number itself, not how you look at it, that is, not the base representation