i want to take nostr:nprofile1qqsq8dvnau7e2ypt2j7l7amjsyc60saal6gq0v9e9ntuft22qqsaufgpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnzv9hxgtcfwdm5h Bitcoin class final exam and see how i do.
Fair enough, parts of cryptography are based on the assumption the reimann hypothesis is true. (I think it is). But proving it true is the longest standing millennium problem. If it's solved we get to understand lots about the distribution of prime numbers
The Reimann Hypothesis will ve solved with complex geometry. Using analytics and data is useful but when dealing with infinity, even a few trillion anecdotes don't matter.
Fly as hell
Have a Good GM morning
The Reimann Hypothesis is true. If you can prove it you get $1m (from CI). It's the longest standing millenium math problem based on work prolosed from Reimann picked up from Gauss and Euler.
The problem is very interesting because its related to the distribution of prime numbers. Something Gauss could never prove.
We can only guess how many prime # are between any two limits (with pretty good accuracy) but if the reimann hypothesis is true we can tell exactly how many.
It's related to Crytography. Lots of math is already built with the assumption it is true.
Disproving it would be as simple as finding a non trivial zero that doesn't lie on the critical line (midpoint of critical strip x=1/2)
Every NT-zero lies on the critical line (x = 1/2). Imo.
The zeta function is telling you something when it produces a zero.
Trillions of non trival zeros have been found on the critical line analytically.
All you have to do to prove it is: find a way to describe where ALL the critical zeros are.
Finding the 1st few trillion doesn't matter when there is infinity of them.
To find the shape of the object mathematically would prove it one way or another.
My guess is it will be solved with geometry. And that's where I'm studying.
The object itself isn't rigid, it's probabilistic. To find its shape is like shooting a paintball at an invisible object until you can make it out. The paintballs being critical zeros.
The fx's graph is a shadow of the object. You can only go so far with analytic continuation.
Zero outputs from the fx can be imagined as a point in space where the energy is zero.
Like two dissonate waves colliding making a shape from where the waves cancel and energy is zero. The still points on a vibrating membrane. Bottom of the sin wave.
I think it gets proven true before 2040.
It goes away just because its part of the notation of the function and once you've done the operation that descriptor goes away because you now have juat the result. You get the swirl (operation) with its limits = to something and the dx literally means add the area of all the pieces the function makes within these limits.
100%
Do this
Agreed. Integration is the area under the curve the d/dx function makes
