Math Forum / Mathematics / Undergraduate Math / February 2006

Ok, next post is a post of the solution to the factoring problem with a
proof that it is a solution, and I remind tha you are NOT to touch your
stocks or savings as it will only make it worse for you.
I made my decision by considering the reality that major discoveries

So now some of you know, the mathematical field is corrupt.
I don't know exactly when it happened but at some point over the last
hundred years the discipline was corrupted and at this point,
spectacular results can be blocked by most mathematicians simply doing

hiya
If one of two functions f(x) and g(x) is not differentiable then neither is the product (f * g)(x) differentiable. That is because if g(x) is not
differentiable at point x, then when h-->0 from left, function (f * g)'(x) will be approaching different value than if h-->0 from ...

For YEARS now several posters have gotten away with claiming to refute
key conclusions from my mathematical research, where my use of
non-polynomial factorization is challenged in a way that deserves close
examination.

how can I write 0.99999...as a fraction?
Any help much appreciated.
Thanks
Marti

Ok, so I hedged yet again, as you can't generally solve out the latest
surrogate factoring equations to get an integer solution, but there's a
hypothesis I have which may mean it doesn't matter:
With T the target integer to be factored I found the simple system:

I've had the equations that solve the factoring problem for well over
six months now, as I discovered them last year back in the summer I
think it was:
T = (x+y+vz)(vz-x)

This post outlines a solution to the factoring problem with working
equations and a proof that it is a solution.
Given a composite T to be factored, a factorization algorithm follows
from the system of equations:

(These are original JSH postings to this group which I have compressed, so
we can get an overall view of what he is talking about)
Current Stats:
Pages                                  31

Hi Group,
I'm having trouble working out the domain for a composite function. I
have f(x) = sqrt(x+1) and g(x) = 1/x.
Then, f(g(x)) = sqrt(1/x + 1)

Reality is that I think that a lot of the people who post regularly on
math newsgroups are very ill-mannered.
Sure, often I am, but I use tactics, and get really ticked off at
people who make it their business to try and control the freedom of

My own non-polynomial factorization research is easily tied into
cryptology, and I had a paper published in the  now defunct Southwest
Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics (SWJPAM), but coincidentally an
Anatoly Plotnikov, a mathematician, had a paper published in the summer

(These are original JSH postings to this group which I have compressed, so
we can get an overall view of what he is talking about)
Change Record
Change #1, corrected orgional spelling of "original"

Ok, so I can just go to the complex plane to prove a key result, and
show how it follows from the distributive property, where I have to go
to the complex plane to remove all that factor crap, where people will
use the ring of algebraic integers, which I prove has a problem, to say

My linear algebra book has a table for rotational operators for Rn wherein
it gives the operator, an illustration, the equations, and the standard
matrix.  The book says the equations for counterclockwise rotation about the
positive y-axis through an angle t are: