Non-locality of Quantum Mechanics is divine thing - Omnipresence

[questfortruth]

I love reading and If I felt that I could be of any help to you, I would read it, but I'm really bad at math. I like it, but my brain doesn't cooperate
I've always felt a little depressed about that. It's very frustrating to be so bad at something that actually appeals to me.

No math, but scientific proof of Riemann Conjecture: it is mainly just logic- Exceptions from Robin's Inequality, viXra.org e-Print archive, viXra:2011.0198

 

[Vee]

No math, but scientific proof of Riemann Conjecture: it is mainly just logic- Exceptions from Robin's Inequality, viXra.org e-Print archive, viXra:2011.0198

I read the pdf, but I'm afraid I'm not familiar enough with the subject to understand it properly so I can't give you an opinion. Sorry.

 

[questfortruth]

I read the pdf, but I'm afraid I'm not familiar enough with the subject to understand it properly so I can't give you an opinion. Sorry.

It is simple:
Dr. Hardy and another doctor I have quoted, have said, that math must be beautiful. If there infinite many cases, where the Riemann Hypothesis is violated, then math is absolutely ugly. Thus, Riemann must be right.

 

[QuestioningMind]

My proof: Файл из Облака Mail.ru

It was submitted to viXra and rejected! Is it good, that viXra.org became just another arXiv.org?
Same merciless restrictions and unofficial peer-review. Look, the rejection letter:

Your submission cannot be processed because it is not written scholarly in that the article title is sarcastic, the article content is crudely put together without scientific references etc, and the comment section on the submission form is filled with inappropriate remark ("Rejected by many top journals without review"). Please be kindly guided. Any future non-compliant submission or replacement will be rejected without further notice. Sincerely, viXra Admin

So have you attempted to submit something that doesn't have a sarcastic title? Have you resubmitted it without putting it together crudely while citing scientific references etc.? Did you try again without filling the comments section with inappropriate remarks?

You refused to follow their basic guidelines, so why should they take anything that you submit seriously?

I'm an author and if I submit a manuscript to a publisher that's scribbled in longhand with every other word misspelled and endless grammatical errors and they reply that it's far too unprofessional for them to read, I'd have to be an idiot to complain that they refused to take my book seriously. Why should they? I've already proven myself unworthy of their consideration by submitting a manuscript filled with basic errors.

 

[ratiocinator]

No math, but scientific proof of Riemann Conjecture:

Dr. Hardy and another doctor I have quoted, have said, that math must be beautiful. If there infinite many cases, where the Riemann Hypothesis is violated, then math is absolutely ugly. Thus, Riemann must be right.

Is all this some kind of joke?

 

[gnostic]

God is Love.

Really?

If I remember correctly, in the Ten Commandments, God said he is a “jealous god”. He would punish anyone who don’t worship him.

That’s petty. Is god a petty god?

It certainly isn’t love.

And how many times have he punished people, who turned away from him? Does that make him god of wrath or rage?

 

[gnostic]

these are not statements, but definitions, which are true only within the paper. A definition can not be wrong. For example: God is Love. Thus, such God must exist, because Love does.

Where am I ?

It would seem that I have accidentally walked into funny farm...