Theory Of Everything - The Goldbach Conjecture

[infinitelydivisible]

101010100010111111110

[00nfinityify]

hey dude .. as a mathematician I prefer to get my hands dirty when dealing with a mathematical case.. to best way for that is to face the blackborad and chalk . this is not a boring geography matter ! you dude can't face it .. what a load of

....... !

[00nfinityify]

to say that you remain unbeaten is quiet not true , it wouldn't take me two lines to bring all what you said down to its knees .. the only reason for me not to do so is that you're unqualified to understand my argument . you need to have that minimum ground or platform to build on .. any attempt to prove you something would look like barking at the wrong tree .. your boat is sinking while at the bay .. you're not offshore yet .. take easy dude !

[protheory]

@00nfinityify So you think you can destroy my argument but refuse to say why or how, forgive me but isn't this a cop out? I really fail to see why I'm unqualified to understand a universal principle of three forces to be honest, as is my argument previously stated. I usually get excuses or SHOUTING once people realise they can't pin me down as such. Why don't you make a video response to my video? I don't understand what 'quiet not true' is meant to mean, perhaps it was a typo?

[protheory]

@00nfinityify please bring all I said to its knees in less than 2 lines on video, leaving me with no response whatsoever, if you're that good.

[00nfinityify]

the thing is dude if I was to make a case and prove something I would use the mathematical tool at hand and not turn it into a boring geography matter ,because at the end of the day mathematics ain't a walk in the park dude.

[protheory]

@00nfinityify sorry I reacted negatively I just get sick of people with no videos under 30 leaving me unqualified insults and comments. The Goldbach Conjecture clearly asks if a condition is true or false. My theory says that it's true, false, and neutral simultaneously. Whether we take things that literally or not depends on context. My context is TOE and the video title says this. I'm not against maths I'm promoting a TOE.

[protheory]

@00nfinityify and for what it's worth you've made no case against me so far. I'm not out to cause trouble just saying what I think. My channel has been featured on Youtube.com home page for 3 days before but I don't boast that they picked me. I challenged everybody on Toequest.com (protheory) and still remain unbeaten but I don't shove it in peoples faces. I wouldn't mind these comments if somebody could prove me wrong but it's yet to happen, nothing to do with me it's just what a TOE does.

[00nfinityify]

stupid is an understatement ..! there is a vacancy for you .. the corner kebab shop !

[protheory]

@00nfinityify Why don't you make some of your own videos and then comment, anybody can register an account and make insulting comments from behind a keyboard.

[prathik728]

I am not able to understand what you are telling because the video is too long and I can't understand your accent properly.

But I'd like to say that Goldbach Conjecture is impossible to prove because there exists no function which gives only prime numbers as the result.

Although as the number value increases, the probability of a combination to exist which results to it in a sum increases, thus the theorem is assumed to be true.

[Entertainmentwf]

not quite. You can't say it's impossible to prove just because of that. There do exist uncomputable number sequences that can be proven to have properties. You would need to show Goldbach's Conjecture is Incomplete (meaning you can't prove it).

Nobody knows it can't be proven. No result has been presented thus far. I know this because, I do very active research on Goldbach Numbers.

[jameswp266]

Many thanks for posting :)

[chrisdarroch]

Yeah mate.

You are simply an over easy target. There would be no point in politely pointing out your errors or faults in presenting. You are like those allowed onto the initial stages of The X Factor. The people we are expected to laugh at; the one's who are so delusional and talentless that no amount of coaching or advice would ever be able to make any difference to their abilities.

You can't sing man! You cannot write songs mate. This is natural selection calling. Is it insulting if true?

[protheory]

It's insulting, not insulting plus neutral if you really want to know.

[carlmelanson1]

@chrisdarroch LOL. I just asked him if he can explain to me why the neutron and the proton have a different mass when they are made of the exact same thing, quarks. I want to see if he can figure it out. I somehow doubt he even knows what quarks are. This is too entertaining.

[protheory]

If I were you I might have said something like 'good effort but have you ever thought your videos might benefit from a little more structure, perhaps a script or similar? Just a suggestion to improve the overall presentation...' or something like this. This to me (importantly, I only have my own standards to go by here) is a 'fair comment' using neutral language and non-offensive/non-critical suggestions.

[protheory]

For what it's worth yes this is obviously a public video. The difference for me between fair comments and criticism is fair comments are not insulting and are neutral/constructive in at least a polite manner. If I don't like a video I don't comment on it, no point spreading negativity..

[cozzaboi2k8]

I would like to add on what 'chrisdarroch' has recently just stated to you about the boring and uncaptivating nature of your videos. In short, your videos are boring to say the least, but they give math a bad reputation and I would just like to alert all your viewers, mainly concerning viewers that may find math boring as it is, that math is nowhere near as boring as the way you depict it in your 'mentally draining videos'.

[protheory]

Boredom is a state of mind. I don't make my videos to be exciting, I make them to show how my theory works. Exciting or not it's the best I could do at the time. Don't you think my viewers could decide for themselves if it's boring? To be honest I think it's a moot point in this context. I'm not bitchin, just saying 'this is me, this is my idea...' Peace

[chrisdarroch]

Really Really bad presentation. You sound like you know very little about these subjects. You sound really boring and make math sound even more boring than it should.

Your theories are superficial at best.

You have no actual substance.

Droning, droning..........droning on.......and on.......getting nowhere..........knowing nothing much.

[protheory]

Why is it always people posting me negative comments who have NO videos and NO photos? Is there anywhere in my video that I say 'My presentation is excellent and my video is meant to be exciting'? I'm doing my best to communicate, I've taken the risk of putting myself up online and you have NO videos of yourself, not even a photo. Please think before expressing negativity towards me, even if you did have any videos (which you don't) I'd still try to be polite to you :)

[chrisdarroch]

Yes.......but!

This subject is a major part of my work and has been for a long time.

You do not convey any of the drama involved in this question.

GC is so simple to explain but seems so hard to prove. Fascinating.

You attempt to communicate, but you do it poorly. I say; take the criticism. If you need an explanation of why your presentation is boring and droning then I can supply a reasoned case as to that.

I do not say these things unfairly.

[chrisdarroch]

The comments section is here for a purpose and that is so that people who have an interest in a clip can express their views on it.

I have done so; fairly. You hardly get the message across as to what the conjecture is. You need a diagram at least.

Why call yourself protheory and develop websites about matters of theory, mathematica and all when you cannot really explain them and you offer some superficial pseudo solution to them?

How can you improve without honest critique?

[protheory]

Seriously mate, what good is honest intellectual critique when all I'm trying to say is everything is three things? 123...you see...123... Sorry to be like this but it's absolutely fundamental! I have little interest in the intricacies of Goldbach et al as it's not important to my theory. This conjecture asks a question of yes or no, regardless of intellectual debate. Lots of details are fun and all but ultimately irrelevant for the purpose (defined by me) of this video.

[icrushu]

U can call his presentation boring chrisdarroch,but the truth is,his presentation does not need to be exciting. To get the message across all 1 needs to do is turn on the camera and speak up. I really admire him for keeping it clear,and not using any psychology or marketing tricks which tend to act stimulating on human brains in order to keep them entertained.

Another thing,the fact he is not even deleting your bitter criticism shows how much of a character he is,and what a douche bag you are.

[chrisdarroch]

Your response is too vacuous and infantile in so many ways for, me to rate you enough to want to respond in any detailed way.

I suspect 'icrushu' is a pseudonym for 'protheory' or a friend of same.

[icrushu]

It is ok Mr.Expensive Vocabulary,u dont have to debate me,your conspiracy theory is more then enough to convince me.

[protheory]

Oops, that was meant to read 'expressed as the sum of 2 primes' NOT 'all primes' :p

[protheory]

Every even number greater in size than 2 can be expressed as the sum of all primes. Try to prove this and what do we have to do? For starters we'd have to explain literally every single number ad infinitum that was greater than 2 and even. Then we'd have to decide how far we're going, is there an end to numbers? An upper limit perhaps to how far we can increase our even numbers? What if numbers continue forever, how will we EVER prove one way or the other whether Goldbach was right?

[CrazyPurpleDinosaur]

Hello im in College right now and i have to write a small paper on the Conjecture explaining its easy to understand but hare to resolve. So ive been searching on how the heck to explain WHY its hard to resolve and i have no idea how to explain that. How would you go about explaining why its hard to resolve. In laymens terms please im easliy confused

[protheory]

CrazyPurpleDinosaur, it's a simple statement but it's the PROOF that's the difficult bit in reality. It's of the paradox class of problems in layman's terms. Like saying 'all crows are black' or 'God exists.' Seems really simple to assume which it is...until you come to PROVE it. That's the crux of the matter :)

[tomikkkkk]

May I ask how could there possibly be infinitely many prime numbers when they are only a sub set of infinitely many regular numbers?

[protheory]

Thirdly, just for the record, I've checked and as I thought Wikipedia didn't exist at the time I wrote my notes and my original website (pre 2000). The sources I used were mainly the Oxford Dictionary of Physics, the Claymath website, and other books and articles I've found over the years.

[climb1974]

So where do your wonderful ideas and conclusions take you. Maths has in general proved useful in the sense that it has enabled the furthering of our own knowledge. Your ideas seem to say and advance nothing.

[protheory]

Also, you say you've spent only seconds reading my website, do you really think this is long enough? And have you got any evidence to back up your claims? I've got a forum if you fancy a real debate, or look me up on ToeQuest if you like. I don't make these videos to show off my non-degree or pseudo-intellectual skills, I make them because I think the theory of everything is interesting and important and I'd like to help people if possible.

Peace.

[protheory]

My research is from many different sources, I don't claim to be university educated either, I'm just a person with knowledge the same as any other person. I honestly don't see why I need a degree when I've already made these videos, if you look at all my stuff it's all about my own theory, these subjects such as Goldbach etc I use to illustrate my own ideas.

Thanks for reading and watching anyway, sorry to waste your time.

[MikemanxStudio]

ok dude, i spent several prescious seconds of my life reading your website and several more writing. Please save milllions of other seconds in other peoples lives and stop now. You are a pseudointellectual with no academic background who read the wikipedia article on all these subjects and then think you can solve them? These problems have challenged the greatest minds that have ever lived. It you want to be taken seriously, get a degree. Only once you have the propper background.

[crawhip2]

Precious spelled without th "s" ...sorry for being a nerd , einstein know it all...I just have this habit of correcting people's spelling errors. thanx oops than(k)s

[protheory]

What can't you understand?

[seaninin]

i can't understand you

[protheory]

I think I see what you mean here but my thinking leads me to zero being neutral as neutral is the point between opposites. When something is the point between opposites (neutral) it is equally a part of each opposite. This is how I see it anyway, what do you think?

[jiggasnap]

Your neutral alternative is part of the opposite. If I say the value of X is 1, then the opposite of this statement is "the value of X is not one," which encompasses zero as well as all other numbers. Zero is not neutral. In the case of the Goldbach conjecture, it may either be true or false, in which case there exists an even number greater than 4 that cannot be expressed as the sum of two primes. The "neutral" case where the conjecture is only true in some instances fits within the "false" opt

[protheory]

Ok, what is zero then if not neutral?

[themilitantatheist]

You were doing alright with your pet theory until you came to apply it to mathematics.

There is no way in any sense a mathematical statement can simultaneously be true/false/neutral (what would neutral even be in maths?). Goldbach's strong conjecture will be proven (most likely true) at some point, other similar problems are almost solved.

[33550336]

True a Theorem, Corollary, Lemma or what ever cant be said to true/false/neutral at the same time, there would be no point in making such a Theorem, Corollary, Lemma... The Neutral he's referring to, I think (and hope) thats is that the conjecture cant be proven, we know there is some problems thats cant be solved or proofed witch specific problems we do not know but Gödel's incompleteness theorem gives us (loosely) that there indeed exists such problems. so I dont know, he probably meant that.