Interesting paper!
I believe that the author gave more explanation on his formula to his P(N). Right now to me it seems to have been just plucked out of thin air.
Anyways, intelligent nitpicks should be left for the more qualified.
This is not a proof, there are multiple mistakes and they have neglected to prove some areas which I believe to be untrue anyway. I need to head off to the shop, I might sit down later and try and demonstrate why this isn't true unless someone else has either done this or in fact shown me to be wrong.
Glad to know, i am not the only one not thinking that the guy is a loon. I thought people took that paper seriously or something, since no one answered it for quite some time!
This guy is awesome. I have a number of his papers on my computer. He's also "proven" twin primes, Riemann hypothesis, and of course Fermat's Last Theorem.
This is at least a year old, does arxiv ever take out the trash?
it seems clear that if any of those things had been proven the news would have circumnavigated the globe by now. hence the arguments are pretty likely to be bogus. admitedly i have not read the paper, but i am not likely to either.
but if someone gets a date out of it, hey all is not lost. :tongue: