sci.math (date)

sci.math (date)

[Thread Index] [Top] [All Lists]

June 30, 2009

Re: Is the polynomial ring interpretation of abstract algebra A[X] flawed? (was quotient ring nomenclature), Musatov, 19:32
Re: Is the polynomial ring interpretation of abstract algebra A[X] flawed? (was quotient ring nomenclature), Musatov, 19:31
Re: Is the polynomial ring interpretation of abstract algebra A[X] flawed? (was quotient ring nomenclature), Musatov, 19:26
Re: - - Integrating factors and non-exact differential equations, Musatov, 19:11
Re: fourier transform of 1/|x|, Musatov, 14:39
The Anatomy of a New Logic for 3SAT, Musatov, 14:29
3SAT Solution May Lead to New Cancer Therapy, Musatov, 14:20
paypal payment)( www.niketrade08.cn ) paypal wholesale D&G shoes, www.sneaker-shop08.com, 05:04

June 27, 2009

Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, MeAmI.org, 23:33
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, Jan Burse, 21:10
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Aatu Koskensilta, 05:54

June 26, 2009

34_NP_Completeness: Proof, MeAmI.org, 23:54
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, Andrew Tomazos, 22:07
Re: Finite ring isomorphic to Z/nZ, Musatov, 19:32
Re: Conjecture Prime, Musatov, 14:01
Re: Conjecture Prime, Musatov, 13:55
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, tchow, 11:55

June 25, 2009

Re: .9 repeating- Google (and this thread; temporarily) (h)i(j)acked by Musatov Search, Musatov, 22:27
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Robert E. Beaudoin, 21:41
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, Jan Burse, 18:30
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, slawekk, 10:49
Re: Conjecture Prime, pubkeybreaker, 10:06
Re: Conjecture Prime, Dik T. Winter, 08:53
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Aatu Koskensilta, 07:59
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Aatu Koskensilta, 07:47
Re: Expected distance between two points lying on the surface of a sphere, Ray Vickson, 02:40
Re: Conjecture Prime, ab, 02:01
Re: Conjecture Prime, Musatov, 01:47
Re: Determining if a graph is a Cayley graph, Musatov, 01:43
Re: Conjecture Prime, ab, 01:39
Re: Conjecture Prime, Musatov, 01:34
Re: Expected distance between two points lying on the surface of a sphere, Musatov, 01:17
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, MeAmI.org, 01:01
Re: OT, MeAmI.org, 00:58
Re: Dense subspaces of R^2, MeAmI.org, 00:53

June 24, 2009

Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Musatov, 22:59
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, Andrew Tomazos, 21:28
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, tchow, 20:44
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Herman Rubin, 14:13
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, Andrew Tomazos, 11:51
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Chip Eastham, 11:47
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, Andrew Tomazos, 11:35
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Chip Eastham, 11:33
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, David Bernier, 10:53
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, slawekk, 10:33
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, tchow, 09:59
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Frederick Williams, 09:02
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Chip Eastham, 08:54
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, slawekk, 08:29
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, slawekk, 08:15
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, MeAmI.org, 03:42
Available Commands: == [P=NP] ==, Musatov, 01:08
Re: math forums, ab, 00:17
Re: math forums, MeAmI.org, 00:12
Re: math forums, ab, 00:05

June 23, 2009

Re: n = p + q^2 with n even and p, q being primes, MeAmI.org, 23:53
Re: math forums, MeAmI.org, 23:50
Re: Clay Millennium Prize Winner to Donate $1MM Prize to Cure Childhood Cancer, MeAmI.org, 23:37
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, MeAmI.org, 21:41
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, slawekk, 14:37
Re: Clay Millennium Prize Winner to Donate $1MM Prize to Cure Childhood Cancer, herbzet, 10:46
Re: Clay Millennium Prize Winner to Donate $1MM Prize to Cure Childhood Cancer, Dave P, 07:48
Clay Millennium Prize Winner to Donate $1MM Prize to Cure Childhood Cancer, MeAmI.org, 04:40
Re: Missing Link Prime, MeAmI.org, 03:11

June 22, 2009

Re: Missing Link Prime, Sargon, 13:05
Re: The year of Cyber Tester, Dave, 08:14
Re: Three bar equal sign?, MeAmI.org, 06:37
Re: Three bar equal sign?, Nick Keighley, 05:32
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, MeAmI.org, 04:19

June 21, 2009

Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Andrew Tomazos, 23:46
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, William Elliot, 23:44
Re: Three bar equal sign?, Charlie-Boo, 23:15
Re: Three bar equal sign?, Charlie-Boo, 22:50
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Andrew Tomazos, 22:45
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, Jan Burse, 22:11
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, Jan Burse, 22:01
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, Charlie-Boo, 21:14
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Herman Rubin, 20:19
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, Andrew Tomazos, 19:56
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, Jan Burse, 18:51
Re: Three bar equal sign?, Chris Menzel, 18:20
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, Andrew Tomazos, 17:59
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, Marshall, 17:50
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, Jan Burse, 17:08
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, Jan Burse, 17:04
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, Jan Burse, 17:03
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, Jan Burse, 16:25
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Joshua Cranmer, 16:13
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, tchow, 15:53
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, Andrew Tomazos, 15:34
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, Jan Burse, 15:11
Re: Three bar equal sign?, Nick Keighley, 15:03
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, Andrew Tomazos, 14:58
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Jan Burse, 14:56
Re: Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, Jan Burse, 14:46
Formal Proof Language Example - Human-Readable?, Andrew Tomazos, 13:03
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Musatov, 10:04
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Andrew Tomazos, 09:44
Re: Missing Link Prime, Musatov, 04:19
Re: Missing Link Prime, Musatov, 04:12
Re: Missing Link Prime, unixops, 03:48
Re: Cherian Proof Posted on Scott Aaronson's Blog for His Public Response, MeAmI.org, 02:04
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, MeAmI.org, 01:39

June 20, 2009

Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Tim Smith, 23:36
Re: Three bar equal sign?, Charlie-Boo, 21:36
Re: Three bar equal sign?, Charlie-Boo, 21:33
Re: Three bar equal sign?, Charlie-Boo, 21:31
Re: Three bar equal sign?, Charlie-Boo, 21:29
Re: Three bar equal sign?, Charlie-Boo, 21:23
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Musatov, 20:02
Re: MathCAD customers base size?, Vladimir Bondarenko, 19:16
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Andrew Tomazos, 18:01
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Jan Burse, 15:22
Re: MathCAD customers base size?, scoop, 14:16
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, tchow, 13:01
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, tchow, 12:51
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, tchow, 12:46
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Andrew Tomazos, 12:19
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Joshua Cranmer, 11:42
MathCAD customers base size?, Vladimir Bondarenko, 11:12
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, LudovicoVan, 10:57
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Andrew Tomazos, 08:03
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Andrew Tomazos, 07:02
Re: "Crank" Education, Musatov, 06:51
Re: the alternate proof that AP-adics have no fractions #607 new book 2nd edition: New True Mathematics, Musatov, 06:48
Re: "Crank" Education, Musatov, 06:29
Re: "Crank" Education, MeAmI.org, 06:13
Missing Link Prime, Musatov, 03:57
Re: proof outline that AP-adics for NonEuclidean geometry cannot have fractions #606 new book 2nd edition: New True Mathematics, Musatov, 03:18
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Jan Burse, 02:58
Re: Understanding the quotient ring nomenclature, Musatov, 02:29

June 19, 2009

Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Michel Hack, 20:37
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, tchow, 18:23
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Victor Porton, 17:17
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Jan Burse, 15:09
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Jan Burse, 14:57
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, tchow, 14:45
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Jan Burse, 14:37
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Jan Burse, 14:35
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, tchow, 14:33
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Jan Burse, 14:29
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, tchow, 14:28
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Andrew Tomazos, 14:22
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, tchow, 14:22
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, tchow, 14:19
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, pubkeybreaker, 14:19
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Jan Burse, 14:13
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, tchow, 14:09
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, tchow, 14:06
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Jan Burse, 14:06
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, MoeBlee, 13:59
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Herman Rubin, 13:58
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Andrew Tomazos, 13:53
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Herman Rubin, 13:52
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Andrew Tomazos, 13:38
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, tchow, 13:37
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, LudovicoVan, 13:15
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Patricia Shanahan, 13:02
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Jan Burse, 12:40
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Jan Burse, 12:19
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, tchow, 11:35
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, tchow, 11:22
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, H. J. Sander Bruggink, 10:58
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Jan Burse, 10:12
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Marshall, 10:05
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Andrew Tomazos, 09:58
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Jan Burse, 09:51
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Jan Burse, 09:45
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Jan Burse, 09:43
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Jan Burse, 09:40
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, H. J. Sander Bruggink, 09:10
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Frederick Williams, 08:06
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, G. A. Edgar, 07:49
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Andrew Tomazos, 07:47
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Andrew Tomazos, 07:20
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Andrew Tomazos, 06:38
Re: Adams schemes, Magdalena Moczydlowska, 06:25
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Andrew Tomazos, 06:20
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Andrew Tomazos, 06:18
Re: Adams schemes, MeAmI.org, 05:55
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, William Elliot, 05:44
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, H. J. Sander Bruggink, 05:38
Re: Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Musatov, 05:27
Computer-verified Mathematical Proof as Standard, Andrew Tomazos, 04:34
Re: INTEGRAL USED IN POLYNOMIAL TIME, Musatov, 03:13
Proof: G/f(G) is finite cyclic. Derived from "Question on embedding group quotients". by Steve, Musatov <....>, Musatov, 02:37
Proof: G/f(G) is finite cyclic. Derived from "Question on embedding group quotients". by Steve, Musatov <....>, Musatov, 02:36
Re: kritischen Punkte, MeAmI.org, 00:05

June 18, 2009

Re: Pi value of 3.14 redefined as3+ .14 correction for Null zero error!, MeAmI.org, 23:00
Re: Is There Anomaly In Value of pi ?, Chris McDonald, 22:03
Re: Is There Anomaly In Value of pi ?, MeAmI.org, 21:57
Re: Three bar equal sign?, MeAmI.org, 06:11
Re: How to prove the following combinatorial identity?, Musatov, 04:14
Search for "cure cancer", Musatov, 04:10

June 17, 2009

Re: How can P equal N and Not P?, David Bernier, 23:28
Re: How can P equal N and Not P?, MeAmI.org, 19:41
Re: How can P equal N and Not P?, Joshua Cranmer, 18:41
Re: How can P equal N and Not P?, fishfry, 02:58
Re: How can P equal N and Not P?, MeAmI.org, 02:51
Re: How can P equal N and Not P?, MeAmI.org, 02:48
Re: How can P equal N and Not P?, fishfry, 02:05

June 16, 2009

Re: - - Divisibility (involving gcd's), Musatov, 22:21
Re: How can P equal N and Not P?, MeAmI.org, 21:55
How can P equal N and Not P?, MeAmI.org, 21:51
Re: Can FOL formalize all of math?, Musatov, 07:17
Re: Three bar equal sign?, Nick Keighley, 07:07
Re: fourier transform, Musatov, 06:42
Re: What does this formula mean?, Musatov, 06:15
Re: The year of Cyber Tester, MeAmI.org, 01:57

June 15, 2009

Re: The year of Cyber Tester, Vladimir Bondarenko, 20:23
Re: Three bar equal sign?, Virgil, 01:54

June 14, 2009

Re: Three bar equal sign?, Ed Prochak, 19:04
Re: Wolfram Alpha claims to be a primary source., Jon Harrop, 11:15
Re: P=NP (proof), Musatov, 02:54
Re: P=NP (proof), Musatov, 02:29
Re: P=NP (proof), Musatov, 02:21
Re: P=NP (proof), Musatov, 02:19

June 13, 2009

Re: sum of roots of unity, Musatov, 19:08
Re: Yet another funny bug in Maple 13, Musatov, 19:02
Re: Seeking Factual Feedback, Thanks!, Musatov, 18:02
Re: Yet another funny bug in Maple 13, Vladimir Bondarenko, 10:26
Re: Yet another funny bug in Maple 13, Axel Vogt, 09:10
Re: Yet another funny bug in Maple 13, Mate, 07:55
Re: Yet another funny bug in Maple 13, Vladimir Bondarenko, 03:49
Yet another funny bug in Maple 13, Vladimir Bondarenko, 03:18
Re: Three bar equal sign?, herbzet, 03:15

June 12, 2009

Re: GOD BLESS SCI. MATH/ and most fine contributors, Musatov, 21:49
Re: Three bar equal sign?, Musatov, 20:46
Re: Three bar equal sign?, Musatov, 15:19
Re: Three bar equal sign?, Musatov, 15:11
Re: Three bar equal sign?, Musatov, 15:08
Re: Three bar equal sign?, Charlie-Boo, 11:20
Re: Three bar equal sign?, Charlie-Boo, 09:55

June 11, 2009

Re: Three bar equal sign?, NP=P, 22:53

June 09, 2009

Re: [OT] Any advise on free news reader(s)?, Ken Pledger, 17:01
[OT] Any advise on free news reader(s)?, Nimo, 04:44

June 08, 2009

Re: What's this prism fact called?, Martin Musatov, 22:43
Re: What's this prism fact called?, VMCM1905, 22:33
Re: What's this prism fact called?, Martin Musatov, 22:25
Re: What's this prism fact called?, VMCM1905, 22:23
Re: What's this prism fact called?, Martin Musatov, 22:21
Re: Seeking Factual Feedback, Thanks!, Martin Musatov, 22:02
Re: Seeking Factual Feedback, Thanks!, Martin Musatov, 22:01
Re: Seeking Factual Feedback, Thanks!, Richard Heathfield, 18:50
Re: Seeking Factual Feedback, Thanks!, Musatov, 18:30
Re: Seeking Factual Feedback, Thanks!, Musatov, 18:17
Re: Seeking Factual Feedback, Thanks!, Musatov, 18:04
Re: Seeking Factual Feedback, Thanks!, Musatov, 17:57
Re: Seeking Factual Feedback, Thanks!, Richard Heathfield, 17:34
Re: Seeking Factual Feedback, Thanks!, Musatov, 17:11

June 07, 2009

The Cherian Chronicles: Scott Aaronson, "NP=P if P=NP", Martin Musatov, 03:27
Re: Cherian Proof Posted on Scott Aaronson's Blog for His Public Response, Martin Musatov, 03:25

June 06, 2009

Re: Cherian Proof Posted on Scott Aaronson's Blog for His Public Response, Martin Musatov, 23:19
Re: Cherian Proof Posted on Scott Aaronson's Blog for His Public Response, Martin Musatov, 23:10
Re: Planar graph generation, Andrea Taverna, 12:59
Re: Cherian Proof Posted on Scott Aaronson's Blog for His Public Response, Joshua Cranmer, 11:08
Re: Cherian Proof Posted on Scott Aaronson's Blog for His Public Response, Patricia Shanahan, 08:29

June 05, 2009

Cherian Proof Posted on Scott Aaronson's Blog for His Public Response, Martin Musatov, 22:46
Re: Planar graph generation, Casey Hawthorne, 16:19
Planar graph generation, Andrea Taverna, 14:04

June 03, 2009

Re: Hints to exercise problems of Graph Theory with Applications by Bondy and Murty (1976), Martin Musatov, 20:00
Hints to exercise problems of Graph Theory with Applications by Bondy and Murty (1976), Suhkjin Hur, 18:47

June 01, 2009

Re: Seeking Factual Feedback, Thanks!, Patricia Shanahan, 20:53
Re: Is there more bugs in Wolfram Alpha than in Mathematica 7 itself?, P.Joman, 09:44
Re: Seeking Factual Feedback, Thanks!, nick_keighley_nospam, 06:47
Re: Seeking Factual Feedback, Thanks!, nick_keighley_nospam, 06:39
Re: Prodigy Proves NP=P solves (TSP), Martin Musatov, 00:11

May 31, 2009

Re: Prodigy Proves NP=P solves (TSP), Joshua Cranmer, 21:17