Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

+ - Goldback revisited-> 1

Submitted by
donaggie03
donaggie03 writes "Well, my fellow mathematicians, it's that time again. Agostino Prástaro, from the Univeristy of Rome, claims to have proven Goldbach's Conjecture. The 14 page paper,
  THE GOLDBACH’S CONJECTURE PROVED (link to pdf) is pre-published on Arxiv. Prástaro claims to have proven the conjecture through commutative algebra and algebraic topology:
Abstract. We give a direct proof of the Goldbach’s conjecture in number theory, formulated in the Euler’s form. The proof is also constructive, since it gives a criterion to find two prime numbers 1, such that their sum gives a fixed even number 2. (A prime number is an integer that can be divided only for itself other than for 1. In this paper we consider 1 as a prime num-ber.) The proof is obtained by recasting the problem in the framework of the Commutative Algebra and Algebraic Topology.
So is this a valid proof? Are there any glaring errors or has this conjecture finally been proven?"

Link to Original Source
This discussion was created for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Goldback revisited

Comments Filter:
  • You mean other than the fact that the definition of "prime number" has been changed to include the number 1?

    I don't know that it's a "glaring error", but it's certainly a redefinition of the problem.

"One Architecture, One OS" also translates as "One Egg, One Basket".

Working...