Decided to do a post helpful for members of the press. There are actually several avenues for verifying are some big stories around my research, where maybe can guide to questions that can break some of the easier ones to verify. Questions should go to a number theorist. The higher up the chain the better.
1. My paper published where chief editor literally tried to delete out of publication.
Is easy to verify had a paper published, and as have noted EMIS maintains original. Is just a matter of making inquiry to a number theorist about the matter. Asking a couple of pertinent questions:
a) Is the paper correct? Answer is, the paper uses correct methods but gets to a conclusion that other number theory invalidates, revealing a problem.
b) Note that I claim the above, and simply ask, is that true?
If number theorist has looked over paper, then you either have that person, or if lies, you have on record, if claims otherwise, like simply states I'm a crackpot or crank or something derogatory.
2. My find of a clever variation on older ways to count prime numbers.
There is no doubt I have a way to count prime numbers, but its importance is the matter to verify.
a) Are there any known ways to count prime numbers that lead directly to a partial differential equation? Answer is, mine is only one. Press person might get probed on expertise with such a question, how do you know about such things?
b) Is an explanation for continuous functions connected to prime numbers of continuing interest? Answer should be yes. Here is harder as press person would need some SERIOUS expertise or do some major research.
The questions oddly enough stand on their own. And could probably really mess with the mind of a number theorist, especially if DID know of my story. If needed to show an example, then can use this link.
3. My recent find of a new primary way to figure out a modular inverse.
My latest result is very compelling as is less pure math than above, as finding a modular inverse is part of modern public key encryption techniques, which I found out by researching, after my find made May 9th of this year.
a) Is a third primary way to do a modular inverse of interest? Something not derived or related to extended Euclidean algorithm or Euler's theorem? Answer is, yes.
b) If I showed you one, would you go on the record about it?
Where have posted this link a LOT, as talking it up.
Turns out wouldn't take many questions. Each of these things are HUGE, and a slightly curious press person could just ask person you know with an interest in math if could handle them.
How hard can they be?
Getting a bit more creative as realize, yeah, plenty of things could happen if certain people were asked just a few pertinent questions. Maybe if I help the press out with a bit of guidance...well it could happen. May as well try.
James Harris
No comments:
Post a Comment