Comments on: Easy as abc http://bit-player.org/2007/easy-as-abc An amateur's outlook on computation and mathematics. Fri, 29 Aug 2008 05:21:04 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.2 Comment on Easy as abc by: brian http://bit-player.org/2007/easy-as-abc#comment-1479 Fri, 25 May 2007 20:18:27 +0000 http://bit-player.org/2007/easy-as-abc#comment-1479 Sorry about the clunky comment interface. Thanks for persisting. I now face a quandary. If I correct the error you have discovered, then the text of the original posting will no longer mislead or confuse readers who come upon it anew. But when those reads come to your comment, saying that the relational operator is reversed, they'll then look back to the text, and mentally reverse it again.... I guess we can only hope they'll also read <em>this</em> comment. Sorry about the clunky comment interface. Thanks for persisting.

I now face a quandary. If I correct the error you have discovered, then the text of the original posting will no longer mislead or confuse readers who come upon it anew. But when those reads come to your comment, saying that the relational operator is reversed, they’ll then look back to the text, and mentally reverse it again….

I guess we can only hope they’ll also read this comment.

]]> Comment on Easy as abc by: Carl Witty http://bit-player.org/2007/easy-as-abc#comment-1478 Fri, 25 May 2007 19:34:27 +0000 http://bit-player.org/2007/easy-as-abc#comment-1478 Let me try that again. (It would sure be nice if there was a "preview" button in the comment interface...) The paragraph describing the abc conjecture (starting “In 1985″) seems to have a couple of problems: 1) I’m pretty sure you mean “&#62; c”, not “&#60; c", in the actual statement of the conjecture. 2) I think you've got the quantifiers backward in your English text. I read the text as saying that there is a single set of exceptions that works for any positive epsilon, but I think the set of exceptions would have to depend on epsilon. Let me try that again. (It would sure be nice if there was a “preview” button in the comment interface…)

The paragraph describing the abc conjecture (starting “In 1985″) seems to have a couple of problems:

1) I’m pretty sure you mean “> c”, not “< c”, in the actual statement of the conjecture.

2) I think you’ve got the quantifiers backward in your English text. I read the text as saying that there is a single set of exceptions that works for any positive epsilon, but I think the set of exceptions would have to depend on epsilon.

]]> Comment on Easy as abc by: Carl Witty http://bit-player.org/2007/easy-as-abc#comment-1477 Fri, 25 May 2007 19:31:30 +0000 http://bit-player.org/2007/easy-as-abc#comment-1477 The paragraph describing the abc conjecture (starting "In 1985") seems to have a couple of problems: 1) I'm pretty sure you mean "&#62; c", not " The paragraph describing the abc conjecture (starting “In 1985″) seems to have a couple of problems:

1) I’m pretty sure you mean “> c”, not “

]]>