Sure Matt. What investors, where? On AGI forum? I've watched you guys struggling to get funding for your devs for years. Maybe you were trying to scam and now your unscientific mind is projecting? It's possible. How stupid do you think investors are?
45 years, in fact, the search for z(5). It's a dead stop. Why is z(5) critical? I'll risk a profound prediction. The one who unlucks z(5), unlocks the world. The Riemann Hypothesis becomes a universal constant, the Fine Structure Constant becomes derivable. Deep mysteries, become fact. I need to thank you for making me realize I should submit a paper for peer review. It's silly to go around bandying claims without scientific support. I'll submit a paper. Not for zeta though, but for having derived the mathematics for optimal efficiency. Previously predicted, not yet derived from first principles. I noted you chose the benefit of non truth, leveling veiled accusation instead. Decide as you will. The world doesn't rotate around your opinion. Z(x) def doesn't care for our opinions. I hope someone else here took better notice though. That's my objective. I have my reasons. I'm sharing a message, not asking anyone here for anything. Where's the evidence of an attempted scam? On Thu, 20 Nov 2025, 02:17 Matt Mahoney, <[email protected]> wrote: > Zudilin in 2001 proved that at least one of zeta(5, 7, 9, 11) is > irrational. And then I got stuck. I am trying very hard to believe that > your post is not complete nonsense and you aren't just using big words to > scam investors into your magic energy generator. > > -- Matt Mahoney, [email protected] > > On Wed, Nov 19, 2025, 2:48 PM Quan Tesla <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Matt, I said what I said. The theory checks out. >> >> Let the discerning discern: k=-1, 0, 1 recursive. compounds giving way to >> primes. a proposal for zeta(5, 7, 9, 11) made. Those who care about truth, >> would care. Those who don't, won't. It's that simple. Choicepoint every 25 >> ms. The conduit doesn't own, it relays. >> >> Only humans are welded to their own self interests and self gratification >> at the expense of other humans, nature, Earth, the solar system, all the >> way to Sag A*... and back again. With our brainheartgut frequency, we >> rationalize and justify all, many polluting as they go. Survival justifies >> everything, doesn't it? We'll see. >> >> I'm not holding my breath for novel tech to reach humankind in my >> lifetime. Someone, somewhere is sure to try and grab and destroy it. My >> purpose is to complete and store, as my contribution to the global >> workspace in the collective memory, as an alternative cosmic signal. I've >> had a meaningful life. >> >> Thanks for the chat. I'll leave off here. >> >> >> On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 8:30 PM Matt Mahoney <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Nov 18, 2025, 3:20 PM Quan Tesla <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> No, I can't. I haven't yet read the scientific-to-ordinary dictionary. >>>> It's an unpublished theory Matt, rigorous, but still in development. There >>>> are no peer-reviewed (physics) papers for my portion of the unified theory. >>>> If you were scientificlly interested, you'd show interest in the content, >>>> not try and show me up. >>>> >>> >>> In another post you say you can manufacture 50K units for $6M. So I >>> assume you have the design nailed down. >>> >>> You say that it requires exotic materials only made in 3 countries. What >>> materials? A wormhole has negative spacetime curvature, which requires >>> negative mass, which accelerates in the opposite direction of an applied >>> force. If you drop it, it would fall down following the same spacetime >>> geodesic as ordinary matter in response to the upward force of gravity. But >>> when it hit the ground, the upward force would cause it to accelerate >>> downward, exponentially increasing the force. >>> >>> I'm not sure what would happen next because it depends on what the >>> negative mass is made of. It wouldn't be protons, neutrons, or electrons >>> like ordinary matter, or any other known particles because they all have >>> positive mass. One possibility is that the negative mass converts to >>> negative energy and absorbs an equal amount of positive mass with no energy >>> release. >>> >>> Another is that it just falls through the earth. When you push on an >>> object, the force is electrostatic repulsion between electrons in the two >>> surfaces constrained by the Pauli exclusion principle which prohibits two >>> fermions (particles with half integer spins) from having the same quantum >>> states. That wouldn't apply between positive and negative mass particles. >>> >>> So if you would, please explain your invention in scientific terms like >>> you would in your patent application. >>> >>> >>> -- Matt Mahoney, [email protected] >>> >> *Artificial General Intelligence List <https://agi.topicbox.com/latest>* > / AGI / see discussions <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi> + > participants <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/members> + > delivery options <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription> > Permalink > <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-M49127a7cffa4aa72c89115ab> > ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7ff992c51cca9e36-Ma6342dd803b583c0ab001ae7 Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
