Comments on: Proposed Riemann hypothesis proof by Julio Alcantara-Bode http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2009/02/05/proposed-riemann-hypothesis-proof-by-julio-alcantara-bode/ The blog of John D. Cook Sat, 11 Feb 2012 22:42:11 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Sam Gilbert http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2009/02/05/proposed-riemann-hypothesis-proof-by-julio-alcantara-bode/comment-page-1/#comment-14035 Sam Gilbert Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:49:05 +0000 http://www.johndcook.com/blog/?p=1457#comment-14035 Re: Riemann hypothesis Perhaps your readers would be interested in: http://www.mmdnewswire.com/famous-math-problem-4626.html http://www.riemannzetafunction.com http://www.amazon.com/Riemann-Hypothesis-Roots-Zeta-Function/dp/143921638X/ref=sr_11_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1232825792&sr=11-1 Re: Riemann hypothesis

Perhaps your readers would be interested in:

http://www.mmdnewswire.com/famous-math-problem-4626.html

http://www.riemannzetafunction.com

http://www.amazon.com/Riemann-Hypothesis-Roots-Zeta-Function/dp/143921638X/ref=sr_11_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1232825792&sr=11-1

]]> By: Juan Vidal L. http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2009/02/05/proposed-riemann-hypothesis-proof-by-julio-alcantara-bode/comment-page-1/#comment-13285 Juan Vidal L. Fri, 13 Feb 2009 15:55:29 +0000 http://www.johndcook.com/blog/?p=1457#comment-13285 La prueba del inigualable Phd Julio Alcantara es correcta. UNI 2002-2 - IMCA lo máxino La prueba del inigualable Phd Julio Alcantara es correcta.

UNI 2002-2 – IMCA lo máxino

]]> By: RP http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2009/02/05/proposed-riemann-hypothesis-proof-by-julio-alcantara-bode/comment-page-1/#comment-12959 RP Sat, 07 Feb 2009 15:54:12 +0000 http://www.johndcook.com/blog/?p=1457#comment-12959 Julio's proof was already withdrawn due to a crucial error. Julio’s proof was already withdrawn due to a crucial error.

]]> By: John http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2009/02/05/proposed-riemann-hypothesis-proof-by-julio-alcantara-bode/comment-page-1/#comment-12925 John Fri, 06 Feb 2009 21:15:34 +0000 http://www.johndcook.com/blog/?p=1457#comment-12925 I'm not a number theorist or a cryptographer, so you may want to take my answer with a grain of salt. I believe if RH were proven true, that would prove the existence of factoring algorithms that could have consequences to cryptography. Most people are pretty use RH is true, as you say. But if people knew for certain that RH were true, that might give them more confidence to try to make some of these algorithms practical. And it's possible that a proof of the RH might itself suggest new algorithms. I’m not a number theorist or a cryptographer, so you may want to take my answer with a grain of salt. I believe if RH were proven true, that would prove the existence of factoring algorithms that could have consequences to cryptography. Most people are pretty use RH is true, as you say. But if people knew for certain that RH were true, that might give them more confidence to try to make some of these algorithms practical. And it’s possible that a proof of the RH might itself suggest new algorithms.

]]> By: Danny http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2009/02/05/proposed-riemann-hypothesis-proof-by-julio-alcantara-bode/comment-page-1/#comment-12893 Danny Fri, 06 Feb 2009 05:34:23 +0000 http://www.johndcook.com/blog/?p=1457#comment-12893 My (limited and possibly incorrect) understanding of the Riemann hypothesis is that we're pretty sure it is true--there have been very many zeros found, and they all have real component 1/2. Can you elaborate on what the practical implications of a proof would be? My (limited and possibly incorrect) understanding of the Riemann hypothesis is that we’re pretty sure it is true–there have been very many zeros found, and they all have real component 1/2. Can you elaborate on what the practical implications of a proof would be?

]]> By: Riemann hypothesis proof? — The Endeavour http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2009/02/05/proposed-riemann-hypothesis-proof-by-julio-alcantara-bode/comment-page-1/#comment-12890 Riemann hypothesis proof? — The Endeavour Fri, 06 Feb 2009 04:38:27 +0000 http://www.johndcook.com/blog/?p=1457#comment-12890 [...] 5 Feb 2009: Another proposed proof. ? [...] [...] 5 Feb 2009: Another proposed proof. ? [...]

]]>