Recent content by Borogoves

please try to correct the latex, I cannot get it to display my results.

I have mailed my results to a few professors ,none of whom have responded. applying mellins transform to get: \zeta (s) = \frac{1}{s-1} - s \int_0^1 h(x) x^{s-1} \, dx \phi : \kappa \longrightarrow\sigma where h(x) is the gauss kuzmin wirsing operator \int_0^(pi/2)\ 1\fract...

I define zeta to be: 1/s-1 \-s \int_{0}^{\1}dx\h(x)x^s-1 Evidently, somebody is attempting to edit my posts.

I was refferring to the real zeroes. stop the niggling remarks

latex has not displayed as intended. It is a definition, it cannot be false. {{a+ib}}>1 where the former is the norm. a(bc)=/= (ab)c and a(ab)=a^b (ab)b=ab^2 I'm claiming that the integral is bound by ~ (x^1/3) /logx where x is large, say >10^10 1/log b+ 2/log b + 3!/logb +...

let \zeta(z)=\sum_{n \in \mathbb{N}} n^{-z} ~ {{a+ib}}>1 then, \zeta(z)=0 iff z=-2n where n is a natural number. pi(x)=\int_0^\infty\frac{dx}{\xS[x+1]} gamma(x+) where S[x+1]= \sum_{n \in \mathbb{N}} n^-{x+1} I have discovered that pi(x)=\int_a^b\frac{dx}/logx = 1/log b+ 2/log b...

Why should he respond ? for the same reason that he chooses to respond to other members, whatever that reason may be. It's called equality. The trouble is, the question itself is rather vague, and therefore is prone to various interpretations. It was certainly not my intention to cause this...

Oh don't be so arrogant young man. The Poynting vector is locally invariant. _________________________________________________________________

I can see that you've deliberately deviated from the question which I posed, namely, how physicists define time. Furthermore, the response you gave to this gentleman is way too advanced. I think what HallsoIvy said sums it up nicely.

Which is meaningless. Too vague !

As a non physicist, I ask you, how do you physicists define time ?

I'll get to the rest of this in a minute, but to see what's wrong with this argument consider a similar one: What would you say is enough to prove a theorem? It's not an easy question to answer, since, many mistakes are made in proving theorems, and we still do not know every theorem of...

I have been diagnosed with various mental conditions in the past, but of course these so called psychiatrists are wrong. It is obviously not good to confuse the kids, but teaching them to manipulate powers is surely a bit much for third grade ? You see the trouble with you is that you are...

And in what way will that benefit the children ? There could be a total of 100 children, and yet none of them sharing a birthday. There could be 10 people, and 5 sharing birthdays. Can you see now how speculative this is ? It will only confuse the children.

It does not actually even make sense to say that there is, or is no friction in the microscopic world.