View Single Post
Old 2006-10-23, 16:01   #38
ewmayer's Avatar
Sep 2002
Rep├║blica de California

101101101010012 Posts

Originally Posted by Patrick123 View Post
I ask you then with tears in my baby blue eyes, if postive 5 is not a prime, then according to your definition, it must be composite.
Patrick - it's clear to me that TM is not using "prime" in the normal sense at all. See my post above, where I wrote

Originally Posted by ewmayer
OK, so I'm just going to ignore the silly and confusing "possible primes" verbiage invented by Mr. Munkner, and instead use simply "integers of the form 6*m+1" wherever it occurs.
So when TM says "5 is not prime", just substitute "5 is not of the form 6*m + 1 for integer m", and there you go.

As I also noted, use of misleading/nonstandard/obfuscatory terminology is a hallmark of crankery. If you can't say whatever it is you think you have to say using nonambiguous, easily-understandable standard terminology, that tells me you're either trying to deliberately confuse, or you don't know what you're talking about.
ewmayer is offline   Reply With Quote