[AntonioLao]

Pogorzelski (1977) claimed to have proven the Goldbach conjecture. See more at http://mathworld.wolfram.com/GoldbachConjecture.html

[Guille]

Why isn't Pogorthelisky's proof accepted? Is it anywhere around the internet?

If I were to say 1 name of someone which I believe has the ability to proof goldbach's conjecture, it would be mine, for my mind is the only one I "know" about.

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by GUILLE Why isn't Pogorthelisky's proof accepted?

My guess is maybe it was not generalized. But I couldn't even find the writeup anywhere in the web. Are you gonna prove this conjecture using binary numbers?

[Guille]

Originally Posted by AntonioLao My guess is maybe it was not generalized. But I couldn't even find the writeup anywhere in the web. Are you gonna prove this conjecture using binary numbers?

The thing is that I remember nothing from binary numbers. I did it like 4 or 5 year ago in shool, but we didn't go into it much at all. I've forgotten it.

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by GUILLE I've forgotten it.

I'll email something to refresh your memory about binary numbers.

[Guille]

Originally Posted by AntonioLao I'll email something to refresh your memory about binary numbers.

Thanks.

Do you really think they can help to create the TOE?

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by GUILLE Do you really think they can help to create the TOE?

IMHO, the binary number system is more general than the decimal number system. The digitalization of computers were made possible by binary numbers. Compared to analog signals, the digital signal increases tremendously the SN (signal to noise) ratio during transmission avoiding the lost of information.

[Guille]

As I said yesterday in the chat session, I have a basic pciture of what I'm going to do to try and proof the conjecture.

But as the math is very advanced, I need some help.

First, in order for two numbers to be a "fundamental pair of periods" (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Period_lattice) the ratio of them, i.e. w1/w2 doesn't equal a real number. In order to my proof to work, it must happent hat the ratio of two random primes must no be real. Can the ratio of two primes not be real?

[AntonioLao]

Mathematicians are using complex numbers to prove Goldbach conjecture. I think because of the additional dimensional plane that it provides. Personally, this conjecture is better prove just using the real-number axis. All we need to do is defined infinity as a number. I really don't know how this can be done.

[Guille]

Originally Posted by AntonioLao Mathematicians are using complex numbers to prove Goldbach conjecture. I think because of the additional dimensional plane that it provides. Personally, this conjecture is better prove just using the real-number axis. All we need to do is defined infinity as a number. I really don't know how this can be done.

There must be another way.

Just as proper mathematicians, although with less ability, of course, I'm also trying to prove it with he help of the complex plane. This is why I asked you about lattices, but never mind, I think I'm going to buy a book on lattice. I'm trying to proof that for any lattice with a pair of primes and another pair of integers, they sum of each pair wil be equal and will be any integer. The hard thing is to proof this is for all integers.