New Sieving Method, Goldbach's Conjecture

[quazar540]

Hi all,
I've developed a new sieving method that I believe provides a tight lower bound for the counting of certain kinds of primes. I'm 99% sure my solution works, and if so, it would allow the solution of many kinds of problems in additive number theory. The sieving method came out of many months of research on Goldbach's Conjecture, of which I believe I also have a proof. Basically I'm looking for some peer review, preferably by an individual(s) with an advanced degree in mathematics and a personal interest in number theory. I won't submit my solution to anyone who doesn't provide a form of proof of their credentials (emails received from a ****@****.edu address will usually suffice) as I'm wary of academic theft. If you're interested in taking a look at my work, please send me a message including your email address and I will contact you.

Thanks.

P.S. I realize some of you online are going to think that it's very unlikely I have something worth looking at (given the age and difficulty of the problems I'm referencing). While you may be right, I'd appreciate it if only those that are genuinely interested in providing feedback contact me, as I have no time for flame wars or haters. If you think I'm full of ****, fine, but don't waste my time or yours trying to tell me so.

 

[quazar540]

Also, a quick graph of the continuous function that my sieving method returns, demonstrating a tight lower bound on the number of goldbach pairs for a given even integer (function in red, goldbach's comet in blue)

 

[quazar540]

bump. anyone?

 

[SteveL27]

Hi all,
I've developed a new sieving method that I believe provides a tight lower bound for the counting of certain kinds of primes. I'm 99% sure my solution works, and if so, it would allow the solution of many kinds of problems in additive number theory. The sieving method came out of many months of research on Goldbach's Conjecture, of which I believe I also have a proof. Basically I'm looking for some peer review, preferably by an individual(s) with an advanced degree in mathematics and a personal interest in number theory. I won't submit my solution to anyone who doesn't provide a form of proof of their credentials (emails received from a ****@****.edu address will usually suffice) as I'm wary of academic theft. If you're interested in taking a look at my work, please send me a message including your email address and I will contact you.

If you think I'm full of ****, fine, but don't waste my time or yours trying to tell me so.

Not hating here, but when a professional academic is deciding whether to ask to see your paper, they are going to make judgments based on whatever evidence is at hand; in this case, your post.

Demanding to see .edu email addresses because you're afraid of academic theft is, I'm afraid, a classic trait of cranks. I am not saying you are a crank; only that your presentation here gives evidence of crankhood. Claiming as a throwaway line that oh, by the way, you've also solved Goldbach doesn't help.

May I suggest that you simply write up your discovery and post it. Then people will look at it. As long as your paper is on the Internet with your name on it and the date of publication, nobody can steal it; you would always have priority.

There was a guy a few months ago who published a claim that he'd proved P <> NP. He posted his paper and because it looked interesting and he seemed serious, hundreds of complexity theorists worldwide were all over it for days till someone found an error.

Believe me if you've got something good and you publish it, people will read it.