User talk:Billymac00/Archive 1

preamble/basics

The Cooper Union entry sentence is incorrect in that I believe Webb Institute, Deep Springs College, Curtis Institute of Music, and recently Olin College also are fully tuition-free without expectation.

I have in-depth knowledge of control systems and hope to post info on advanced control.

I joined in Sept 2004 and find the project fascinating and useful.

--Billymac00 18:23, Sep 5, 2004 (UTC)

HCN

You've stated in the Highly composite number page In addition, the distance from a HCN to the nearest prime will itself be a prime number (with the exception of "2" being both the HCN and the nearest prime). The distance must always be odd involving an odd and even number. This seems to be a considerable theorem, can you please either prove it or give the source of the theorem? Also the wording has to make it clear that 1 is counted as a prime number here. Karl Palmen 08:20 Apr 25 2006 (UT)

Karl: you are correct, I have editted the wording to clarify it is a conjecture. As an aside, I have no access to 64-bit ops and so am limited to the size of HCN I can analyze--Billymac00 17:54, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Billy: Is this conjecture yours? If no, please quote the source (e.g. name of mathematician who came up with it). If yes, has your program come up with a significant number of differences greater than 9? Karl Palmen 13:05 Apr 28 2006 (UT)

Karl: you are not setup for me to email you thru wiki but I will add link here to a wiki page where you can view the data thru the 160th+ HCN. OEIS sequence still not posted. yes, my orig conjecture. I have added comments to the discussion page of HCN also. Data shows hard evidence of a structural connection between the HCN and primes There are sevl related questions of interest I am curious to learn answers to
for clarity, this HCN conjecture turns out to be R.F. Fortune's in effect, due to the direct HCN-primorial relation.

Orphaned public domain images

The following images were uploaded by you, but are currently not in use. They have been tagged as public domain (PD), either as PD-self or other PD claim, or equivilant. These unused PD images may be subject to deletion as orphans. You may wish to add them to an article, tag them for copying to WP commons {{Copy to Wikimedia Commons}} or if they are no longer needed, they can be nominated for deletion by following the easy three step process at Images and media for deletion. If you have any questions, please leave me a note on my talk page. --Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 20:24, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:SCB_CCCSD.JPG listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:SCB_CCCSD.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. MECU≈talk 23:35, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Primorial

You mailed me. I don't want to get into discussion unrelated to editing Wikipedia. If you want to discuss editing then I suggest we keep it at Wikipedia where other editors can see it. If your work is original research then it is not suited for Wikipedia (many other things are also unsuited). I don't expect to run your program. The Sieve of Eratosthenes can compute all primes below 10^6 in a small fraction of a second on a PC. PrimeHunter 00:58, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have now posted links to my source and exe on my wiki site (above) confirming my conjecture asso with OEIS A129912 (I have 68 terms, but need independent checking, as it is easy to miss terms). The C++ exe will NOT work above 2.2E6, due to the number of available terms and 32-bit UL limits I faced. The pgm is BRUTE FORCE (I am NOT an expert C programmer), I just did it quick &dirty to substantiate the conjecture (step1), step 2 is likely the slowest primality code possible...(2) output files are produced, c:\primes\mylist.txt and c:\primes\primality.txt. For example, if you type >bill_prime2 and enter 10001, the results should report 1229 primes encountered; 100001 should report 9592, etc. The screen output reports the % of examined numbers that were rejected as composite using the conjecture. Thanks to Neil Sloane for his assistance. Thanks to PrimeHunter for reported an initial sequence typo and pointing out the conjecture is working in conjunction with excluding numbers +/-1 off of the sequence entries, and does not accomodate the even prime 2...

I have requirements for reporting a counterexample on my wiki site, but to address the only specific numerical one I was told, prime 189239, that is offset from the 24th sequence entry ~~18180~~ ~~181180~~ 180180 by 9059, which of course is prime and validates the conjecture.--Billymac00 00:34, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

:It sounds like you may have misunderstood my comments at Talk:Primorial. My program shows 3523 counter examples below 10^9 to your modified conjecture. Your original conjecture had 3525 counter examples. Only 2 of those (the primes 2 and 3) stopped being counter examples after the conjecture modification. Do you want a list of the 3523? PrimeHunter 12:01, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see you added a comment about 18180 above. That is not in the sequence but 180180 is, and that shows that 189239 is not a counter example. Sorry, I was wrong. My list of primorial products was incomplete. My mistaken claims were actually influenced by what I warned you about at Talk:Primorial: If you publish trivial errors then people may be quick to dismiss your work. I guessed you could not be trusted and failed to check my own calculations properly when they disagreed with your claims. It appears your conjecture has no counter example below 10^9. Of course that still proves nothing. There are so many products of primorials that each prime gets a lot of chances to be offset by a prime, so if counter examples exist then they should be expected to be rare (I suspect they exist but don't plan to search longer for them). I still think your modified conjecture is far from being notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia. PrimeHunter 01:38, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ok, making some serious headway. I've sketched out a proof of the Conjecture, as well as connected my sequence terms to an existing OEIS sequence, A071562. If one can verify a single property of the sequence terms (A129912), this shows my Conjecture is true as long as Goldbach's Conjecture is true. I like the odds. Again, I'll post on my page link above as time permits...--Billymac00 11:21, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the requirement for a reliable source is very important for new theorems. A peer-reviewed math journal would do. A selfpublished proof or OEIS comment would not. I have fixed 180180 in your earlier comment. PrimeHunter 12:47, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Paper submitted to The Journal of Number Theory as of today ...--Billymac00 17:53, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

here is chart of resulting offset distribution [[1]]--Billymac00 21:44, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

well, primality method has issues, I must take a new tack ...--Billymac00 17:40, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ok, my conjecture is now with Library of Congress (its proof, along with attempt of related proof)--Billymac00 14:26, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have sev'l add'l claims related to MC - it provides a numerical solution subset for Goldbach's Conjecture, as well as quick, efficient targeting/finding a prime of an arbitrary size. I will post all claims asap.--Billymac00 (talk) 19:12, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
for clarity, concerning a comment earlier ["...There are so many products of primorials that each prime gets a lot of chances to be offset by a prime..."], the conjecture has always applied to the 0-2P range for any prime candidate P, for "unlimited" chances one would be referring to the earlier Sokol conjecture, which specified no bound.--Billymac00 (talk) 20:21, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pivot state (U.S.)

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Pivot state (U.S.), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. JPmaverick 11:43, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
...as you wish--Billymac00 14:26, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Twin Primes and MC

well, messing with GC a bit but my latest observation ties Twin Primes to OEIS A129912 as follows:

on surface inspection, look for TP in the vicinity of (N2-N1)/2 where the N are adjacent entries of OEIS A129912

(12-6)/2=3 and we see (3,5) similarly, (30-12)/2 gives 9 and we see (5,7),(11,13) both (60-30)/2 and (210-180)/2=15 and we find (11,13) and (17,19) (360-210)/2=75 and one has (71,73) (420-360)/2=30 and we have (29,31) skipping, (2310-1260)/2 yields (521,523) (4620-2520)/2 yields (1049,1051) (12600-6300)/2 yields (3119,3121) skipping higher, (5405400-3063060)/2 yields (117241,117243) using largest I have, (4162158000-4073869800)/2=44144100 and we see (44144141,44144143) It would seem to be holding ...this is not my particular area of interest but I mention in passing...--Billymac00 (talk) 20:25, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Wet scrubber1.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Wet scrubber1.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 17:08, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]