mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Extra Stuff > Blogorrhea > gophne

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2017-12-31, 19:15   #1
gophne
 
Feb 2017

3·5·11 Posts
Unhappy OMG, I cannot spam anymore in the Forum Feedback where my question was answered!!!!!!!!!!!111111

Hi Admin

Another of my threads about "being blocked" has been blocked!!!!!!

What is going on here? What about freedom of expression/ scientific thought or evenhandedness?

What am I sinning to deserve such treatment. I have never been disrespectful to anybody on the Site. My only crime seems to be that I am dumb or that I dare to defend my positions.

Please help _^_

Last fiddled with by gophne on 2017-12-31 at 19:17 Reason: spelling errors under upset
gophne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-12-31, 19:55   #2
CRGreathouse
 
CRGreathouse's Avatar
 
Aug 2006

22·1,483 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gophne View Post
Another of my threads about "being blocked" has been blocked!!!!!!

What is going on here? What about freedom of expression/ scientific thought or evenhandedness?
I wasn’t the one to close the thread, but it’s pretty clear that it had run its course.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gophne View Post
What am I sinning to deserve such treatment. I have never been disrespectful to anybody on the Site. My only crime seems to be that I am dumb or that I dare to defend my positions.
On the other thread you’ve been quite disrespectful, IMO. You presented the Fermat test as if it were a new discovery and claimed that it had no counterexamples. When you were shown the counterexamples you pretended that you had never claimed that your test worked in all cases. You then proceeded to badger everyone on the thread for a more explicit demonstration of the equality, and persisted in your claim that they were different. It would have been reasonable to close the thread at that point, but instead several forum members jumped to the task and showed painfully explicit baby steps of how the two were the same. But even then you complained that you didn’t understand and that you wanted someone to make it even simpler for you.

At a certain point you should recognize that you don’t have the necessary skills in elementary number theory because you are the only one who couldn’t follow what was going on. If you want to understand you will need to study the basics of modular arithmetic so you can understand us.
CRGreathouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-12-31, 19:55   #3
xilman
Bamboozled!
 
xilman's Avatar
 
"𒉺𒌌𒇷𒆷𒀭"
May 2003
Down not across

7·1,447 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gophne View Post
Hi Admin

Another of my threads about "being blocked" has been blocked!!!!!!

What is going on here? What about freedom of expression/ scientific thought or evenhandedness?

What am I sinning to deserve such treatment. I have never been disrespectful to anybody on the Site. My only crime seems to be that I am dumb or that I dare to defend my positions.

Please help _^_
One of your "crimes" is that you are vague to the point of incomprehensibility. The post above gives absolutely no clue as to which thread has been blocked.

What is going on here is an object lesson in the value of precise and concise communication. You appear to be failing the tests.
xilman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-12-31, 20:17   #4
gophne
 
Feb 2017

3·5·11 Posts
Default I have a bad feeling

Hi Admin

I have a bad feeling that I am going to be debarred soon.

I am very aware that that it is the right of the Site Mods to do so.

Now also my original heading on a tread I have posted to the "feedback" forum has been changed to ridicule me.

Please note this algorithm;

2^n-1 mod (n+2) == (n+1)/2

It is going to make waves.....whether it is Fermat's theorem or not.

I leave it to you and to the users of this forum to decide whether I have been disrespectful. Ignorance is not disrespect.

Would the Mods also be able to close down the sub-blog that you have allocated to me?

Last fiddled with by gophne on 2017-12-31 at 20:18 Reason: correction to formula...division sign left out of algorithm
gophne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-12-31, 21:43   #5
gophne
 
Feb 2017

3×5×11 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CRGreathouse View Post
I wasn’t the one to close the thread, but it’s pretty clear that it had run its course.



On the other thread you’ve been quite disrespectful, IMO. You presented the Fermat test as if it were a new discovery and claimed that it had no counterexamples. When you were shown the counterexamples you pretended that you had never claimed that your test worked in all cases. You then proceeded to badger everyone on the thread for a more explicit demonstration of the equality, and persisted in your claim that they were different. It would have been reasonable to close the thread at that point, but instead several forum members jumped to the task and showed painfully explicit baby steps of how the two were the same. But even then you complained that you didn’t understand and that you wanted someone to make it even simpler for you.

At a certain point you should recognize that you don’t have the necessary skills in elementary number theory because you are the only one who couldn’t follow what was going on. If you want to understand you will need to study the basics of modular arithmetic so you can understand us.
Hi CRGreathouse

Fermat's Primality algorith is;

a^(p-1) ≡ 1 mod p ....source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermat_primality_test

How is this the same as

2^n-1 mod (n+2) == (n+1)/2 ?

For starters Fermat's test is always congruant to 1. The other algorithm is congruant to (n+1)/2, i.e. the modulo is always changing with n

It boggles my mind that anybody can claim that the two are the same.

Yes I did make incorrect claims about the 100% effectiveness of the algorithm in the beginning , but as a results of the promps by the users, I ran code which identified a multitude of false positives. This was partly due to me rushing the post w.r.t to me stated intentions, largely as a result of my disappointment with the "many' "false primes" identified during the running the first 500 000 odd numbers with SAGEMATH.

Referencing Fermat's Primality test, (quoted above) in Wikipedia, highlighted the fact that the Fermat Primality check also contained many pseudo-primes in the range of 28 000 for up to 2.5*10^10

As you have stated right in the beginning perhaps to prepare a paper might be a avenue, as the academic system and the publishing institutions would without a measure of doubt be able to indentify any fraud that might have been committed.

I have repeatedly stated that I have back-up work to show how the algorithm was derived, independantly of Fermat's Primality test, which it is very different as can be seen above.

What was very strange as well was that the initial tack was repeatedly that the algorithm was "nonsense" - until awmayer indicated that the algorithm might just be a re-formulation of an existing "Pseudo-prime Checker". Then the tack shifted to "copy of"/plagiarism. Would this change of argument then not also be "disrespectful" and dis-honest, as both positions cannot be correct at the same time.

“Many people, xxxxxxxxxxx, want to punish you for speaking the truth, for being correct, for being you. Never apologize for being correct, or for being years ahead of your time. If you’re right and you know it, speak your mind. Speak your mind. Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is still the truth.”

― Mahatma Gandhi
gophne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-12-31, 21:52   #6
science_man_88
 
science_man_88's Avatar
 
"Forget I exist"
Jul 2009
Dumbassville

8,369 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gophne View Post

I have repeatedly stated that I have back-up work to show how the algorithm was derived, independantly of Fermat's Primality test, which it is very different as can be seen above.
If one can be transformed into the other they are equivalent statements. This doesn't change just because it was derived differently.

Last fiddled with by science_man_88 on 2017-12-31 at 21:56
science_man_88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-12-31, 22:11   #7
GP2
 
GP2's Avatar
 
Sep 2003

1010000101012 Posts
Default

Help us, R.D. Silverman. You're our only hope.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cc_h5Ghuj4
GP2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-12-31, 22:15   #8
gophne
 
Feb 2017

3·5·11 Posts
Default

Hi GP2

I like it...perhaps Luke Skywalker will come to my rescue :)

Cheers....Happy New Yera if you are in the zone.
gophne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-12-31, 22:23   #9
gophne
 
Feb 2017

3·5·11 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by science_man_88 View Post
If one can be transformed into the other they are equivalent statements. This doesn't change just because it was derived differently.
Hi Science_man_88

For the last time LoL....you may be correct....BUT you must prove identity....identity is not so because you or Billy The Kid might say so. And even if the statement is repeated over and over...the matter is not resolved until the fat lady sings....the fat lady in this case being the results generated by the algorithms using the same inputs...nothing else would suffice, even if the claim is made by Chuck Norris :)
gophne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-12-31, 22:37   #10
science_man_88
 
science_man_88's Avatar
 
"Forget I exist"
Jul 2009
Dumbassville

8,369 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gophne View Post
Hi Science_man_88

For the last time LoL....you may be correct....BUT you must prove identity....identity is not so because you or Billy The Kid might say so. And even if the statement is repeated over and over...the matter is not resolved until the fat lady sings....the fat lady in this case being the results generated by the algorithms using the same inputs...nothing else would suffice, even if the claim is made by Chuck Norris :)
Your same inputs part has nothing to do with it. If you input is n-2 Fermat's output would be for n.
science_man_88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-12-31, 22:40   #11
jnml
 
Feb 2012
Prague, Czech Republ

101001002 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by science_man_88 View Post
Your same inputs part has nothing to do with it. If you input is n-2 Fermat's output would be for n.
If this doesn't help, nothing probably will.
jnml is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Serious question about DH forum. How to get in for free? Stargate38 Forum Feedback 39 2017-09-08 08:14
Question: Is Our Forum Secure in Some Areas 9021951 Information & Answers 7 2011-11-02 23:29
stupidest question you've ever answered science_man_88 Lounge 11 2011-10-10 06:16
Question about spam posts schickel Forum Feedback 27 2009-04-10 08:30
Spam Bot is posting here in forum Matthias C. Noc Forum Feedback 19 2004-11-22 03:37

All times are UTC. The time now is 10:20.

Thu Oct 29 10:20:26 UTC 2020 up 49 days, 7:31, 1 user, load averages: 1.33, 1.65, 1.75

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.