I call it, please let's call it: "Cascading Squares" by Andrea Trella Blakemore

Each and every square "gives up" Non-prime integers (composites) to the vast integer universe.

When the square integers have "exhausted their till of factor pairs", what is left in their wake, like ripples on the water behind each "boat" are the lonely and desolate prime number universe.

Erratic and unpredictable (to date) prime numbers. One of the 10 elusive remaining mathematical mysteries: "Is there a predictable pattern to infinity of when and why Prime Numbers occur?"

Yes!! There is! But it is NOT a positive pattern. It is a VOID pattern of when beautiful and perfect square integers do NOT yield a child.

Oh boy, anyway, phew, I will post the Positive Theory. Whoever out there can find the Negative corollary to my "Cascading Squares" postulate, would help me to achieve that most high goal.

Pattern of Primes to Infinity.

I am a stepping stone only. But I know I (we) have this!!!!

Andrea

How do I post my pattern to infinity??? I took a programming class, learned C+ to code my pattern, coded it. But I am NOT a mathematician so desperately seek collaborator(s).

I am NOT a mathematician by trade. However, I graduated from Connecticut College and worked for 30 years at State Street Bank in Boston. My trade is Software Developer, Software Development Manager, Business Analyst, but as a hobby learned C+ to prove that my theory works to the infinity afforded to me by the hardware means available to me. Damn, I hate this part! Can I just show you please?? If you are passionate about prime number theory, please help me get my program out there? We can be stepping stones to the next way to solve this?

P.S. Especially if you always HATED that the best integer ever, "1" has always been subjugated to neither Prime or Composite. !!! God I hate that !!! It is only because some human being decreed that as definition of Prime..........Stupid !!!.... Keep it simple. ..... 1 is of course ( come on, just try, suspend you imagination, wow, how much easier, can we just agree?? ..1 is the first and original prime, just admit it that a mistake was made early on to "describe" a prime number. You know, we can agree to change that now, in the 21'st century, right? How many times have you had to defend why "1" does not "fit" into traditional definition of prime or not prime?? You know that when it seems too complicated, it also is NOT intuitively correct.. Anyway !! Leaving that one for a much further day. Although, Wow!, does that P me off, thinking of all the classrooms of children who loved math and then wow, this does not make sense ! whatever! then they turn off! please fix that please. We CAN relabel and make students and everybody LOVE math. What turns off some (like me) gifted offerrers new math contributions are snobbish labels and the "fine" human beings who are entitled to protect them. Math and their concepts are free like air out there. Let everyone breathe. You don't need a degree or a snobbish nature or have to have the precise "du jour" mathematical terms to share a new finding.

I sure hope not. Think I have it here. Will you find out???

Andrea Trella Blakemore

Email: Atblakemore64@gmail.com
Cell: 774-410-2490

On Friday, September 15, 2023 at 8:05:29 PM UTC-7, Andrea Blakemore wrote:
> I call it, please let's call it: "Cascading Squares" by Andrea Trella Blakemore
>
> Each and every square "gives up" Non-prime integers (composites) to the vast integer universe.
>
> When the square integers have "exhausted their till of factor pairs", what is left in their wake, like ripples on the water behind each "boat" are the lonely and desolate prime number universe.
>
> Erratic and unpredictable (to date) prime numbers. One of the 10 elusive remaining mathematical mysteries: "Is there a predictable pattern to infinity of when and why Prime Numbers occur?"
>
> Yes!! There is! But it is NOT a positive pattern. It is a VOID pattern of when beautiful and perfect square integers do NOT yield a child.
>
> Oh boy, anyway, phew, I will post the Positive Theory. Whoever out there can find the Negative corollary to my "Cascading Squares" postulate, would help me to achieve that most high goal.
>
> Pattern of Primes to Infinity.
>
> I am a stepping stone only. But I know I (we) have this!!!!
>
> Andrea
>
> How do I post my pattern to infinity??? I took a programming class, learned C+ to code my pattern, coded it. But I am NOT a mathematician so desperately seek collaborator(s).
>
> I am NOT a mathematician by trade. However, I graduated from Connecticut College and worked for 30 years at State Street Bank in Boston. My trade is Software Developer, Software Development Manager, Business Analyst, but as a hobby learned C+ to prove that my theory works to the infinity afforded to me by the hardware means available to me. Damn, I hate this part! Can I just show you please?? If you are passionate about prime number theory, please help me get my program out there? We can be stepping stones to the next way to solve this?
>
> P.S. Especially if you always HATED that the best integer ever, "1" has always been subjugated to neither Prime or Composite. !!! God I hate that !!! It is only because some human being decreed that as definition of Prime..........Stupid !!!.... Keep it simple. ..... 1 is of course ( come on, just try, suspend you imagination, wow, how much easier, can we just agree?? ..1 is the first and original prime, just admit it that a mistake was made early on to "describe" a prime number. You know, we can agree to change that now, in the 21'st century, right? How many times have you had to defend why "1" does not "fit" into traditional definition of prime or not prime?? You know that when it seems too complicated, it also is NOT intuitively correct.. Anyway !! Leaving that one for a much further day. Although, Wow!, does that P me off, thinking of all the classrooms of children who loved math and then wow, this does not make sense ! whatever! then they turn off! please fix that please. We CAN relabel and make students and everybody LOVE math. What turns off some (like me) gifted offerrers new math contributions are snobbish labels and the "fine" human beings who are entitled to protect them.. Math and their concepts are free like air out there. Let everyone breathe.. You don't need a degree or a snobbish nature or have to have the precise "du jour" mathematical terms to share a new finding.
>
> I sure hope not. Think I have it here. Will you find out???
>
> Andrea Trella Blakemore
>
> Email: Atblak...@gmail.com
> Cell: 774-410-2490

You can't express an infinite pattern. You would be waiting forever
iterating its finite.

On Saturday, September 16, 2023 at 6:05:29 AM UTC+3, Andrea Blakemore wrote:
> I call it, please let's call it: "Cascading Squares" by Andrea Trella Blakemore
>
> Each and every square "gives up" Non-prime integers (composites) to the vast integer universe.
>
> When the square integers have "exhausted their till of factor pairs", what is left in their wake, like ripples on the water behind each "boat" are the lonely and desolate prime number universe.
>
> Erratic and unpredictable (to date) prime numbers. One of the 10 elusive remaining mathematical mysteries: "Is there a predictable pattern to infinity of when and why Prime Numbers occur?"
>
> Yes!! There is! But it is NOT a positive pattern. It is a VOID pattern of when beautiful and perfect square integers do NOT yield a child.
>
> Oh boy, anyway, phew, I will post the Positive Theory. Whoever out there can find the Negative corollary to my "Cascading Squares" postulate, would help me to achieve that most high goal.
>
> Pattern of Primes to Infinity.
>
> I am a stepping stone only. But I know I (we) have this!!!!
>
> Andrea
>
> How do I post my pattern to infinity??? I took a programming class, learned C+ to code my pattern, coded it. But I am NOT a mathematician so desperately seek collaborator(s).
>
> I am NOT a mathematician by trade. However, I graduated from Connecticut College and worked for 30 years at State Street Bank in Boston. My trade is Software Developer, Software Development Manager, Business Analyst, but as a hobby learned C+ to prove that my theory works to the infinity afforded to me by the hardware means available to me. Damn, I hate this part! Can I just show you please?? If you are passionate about prime number theory, please help me get my program out there? We can be stepping stones to the next way to solve this?
>
> P.S. Especially if you always HATED that the best integer ever, "1" has always been subjugated to neither Prime or Composite. !!! God I hate that !!! It is only because some human being decreed that as definition of Prime..........Stupid !!!.... Keep it simple. ..... 1 is of course ( come on, just try, suspend you imagination, wow, how much easier, can we just agree?? ..1 is the first and original prime, just admit it that a mistake was made early on to "describe" a prime number. You know, we can agree to change that now, in the 21'st century, right? How many times have you had to defend why "1" does not "fit" into traditional definition of prime or not prime?? You know that when it seems too complicated, it also is NOT intuitively correct.. Anyway !! Leaving that one for a much further day. Although, Wow!, does that P me off, thinking of all the classrooms of children who loved math and then wow, this does not make sense ! whatever! then they turn off! please fix that please. We CAN relabel and make students and everybody LOVE math. What turns off some (like me) gifted offerrers new math contributions are snobbish labels and the "fine" human beings who are entitled to protect them.. Math and their concepts are free like air out there. Let everyone breathe.. You don't need a degree or a snobbish nature or have to have the precise "du jour" mathematical terms to share a new finding.
>
> I sure hope not. Think I have it here. Will you find out???
>
> Andrea Trella Blakemore
>
> Email: Atblak...@gmail.com
> Cell: 774-410-2490

Assuming in good faith that you can solve ALL the long-standing problems in mathematics including the problem you do assert, where you do publish your findingS here on sci.math or any others public moderated site, assuming also that your proofs are so rigorous & although irrefutable!

Then make sure that you would be extremely accused of being (insane, stupid, 🧌 Troll, ..., etc), where the reasons are mainly the especilised academic mainstreams sheeples of mathematics or any other theoretical sciences, where behind that are the official rules of paper publications that are secretly & completely governed by those who are illegally in big positions, where nothing thrilling must be published away from their full control

Although, anything opposing their most false inhireted beileafs must be completely neglected & fought to the last breath

However, the whole problem is completely physiological & deeply rooted to very old human sever mental problems that are mostly incurable by humans themselves

Where actually, & exactly opposite to what does the human fake history tell about the (honosity, nobility, credibility, ..., etc) of mathematicians & alike

And the ugly truth is that the peculiar achievements are given only to chosen categories who are too skilled in cheating the human minds especially at early ages where then more & more of academic 🧌 Trolls we have nowadays out the way of practicing this kind of buissness nowadays

Although, you must completely forget about respecting the public intellectual property, since that is only guaranteed only for those who are controlling & operating secretly the whole business behind the scene

In short, if you are a talented amateur & not a very proffessional, then it is absolutely impossible to arrive the place you deserve at least during your life time

But usually; & more especially in mathematics, they (mathematicians) adore the dead people & may discover them too ginious humans bur years after their death, where their shamful history is full of such unbelievable stories

However, if you discover something you think too important, you can make it in a book you own & never throw it to the academic mainstreams sheeples where they do steal it immediately with many proffessional ways as usually practiced in Donkypedia & Universities

In general, academic people are not at all different from any other people or different from any other religious people who are ALL generally corrupred, where also (dishonesty, innobility, stupidity, denials, jealousy,..., etc( are there perpetual features FOR SURE

Bassam karzeddin 🔊

On Friday, September 15, 2023 at 8:05:29 PM UTC-7, Andrea Blakemore wrote:
> I call it, please let's call it: "Cascading Squares" by Andrea Trella Blakemore
>
> Each and every square "gives up" Non-prime integers (composites) to the vast integer universe.
>
> When the square integers have "exhausted their till of factor pairs", what is left in their wake, like ripples on the water behind each "boat" are the lonely and desolate prime number universe.
>
> Erratic and unpredictable (to date) prime numbers. One of the 10 elusive remaining mathematical mysteries: "Is there a predictable pattern to infinity of when and why Prime Numbers occur?"
>
> Yes!! There is! But it is NOT a positive pattern. It is a VOID pattern of when beautiful and perfect square integers do NOT yield a child.
>
> Oh boy, anyway, phew, I will post the Positive Theory. Whoever out there can find the Negative corollary to my "Cascading Squares" postulate, would help me to achieve that most high goal.
>
> Pattern of Primes to Infinity.
>
> I am a stepping stone only. But I know I (we) have this!!!!
>
> Andrea
>
> How do I post my pattern to infinity??? I took a programming class, learned C+ to code my pattern, coded it. But I am NOT a mathematician so desperately seek collaborator(s).
>
> I am NOT a mathematician by trade. However, I graduated from Connecticut College and worked for 30 years at State Street Bank in Boston. My trade is Software Developer, Software Development Manager, Business Analyst, but as a hobby learned C+ to prove that my theory works to the infinity afforded to me by the hardware means available to me. Damn, I hate this part! Can I just show you please?? If you are passionate about prime number theory, please help me get my program out there? We can be stepping stones to the next way to solve this?
>
> P.S. Especially if you always HATED that the best integer ever, "1" has always been subjugated to neither Prime or Composite. !!! God I hate that !!! It is only because some human being decreed that as definition of Prime..........Stupid !!!.... Keep it simple. ..... 1 is of course ( come on, just try, suspend you imagination, wow, how much easier, can we just agree?? ..1 is the first and original prime, just admit it that a mistake was made early on to "describe" a prime number. You know, we can agree to change that now, in the 21'st century, right? How many times have you had to defend why "1" does not "fit" into traditional definition of prime or not prime?? You know that when it seems too complicated, it also is NOT intuitively correct.. Anyway !! Leaving that one for a much further day. Although, Wow!, does that P me off, thinking of all the classrooms of children who loved math and then wow, this does not make sense ! whatever! then they turn off! please fix that please. We CAN relabel and make students and everybody LOVE math. What turns off some (like me) gifted offerrers new math contributions are snobbish labels and the "fine" human beings who are entitled to protect them.. Math and their concepts are free like air out there. Let everyone breathe.. You don't need a degree or a snobbish nature or have to have the precise "du jour" mathematical terms to share a new finding.
>
> I sure hope not. Think I have it here. Will you find out???
>
> Andrea Trella Blakemore
>
> Email: Atblak...@gmail.com
> Cell: 774-410-2490

That's not very formal but consider this: draw a parabola or y = x^2, it intersects
each integer point that is (x, x^2). So, connect each of the integer points with
straight lines. Where they intersect the line x = 0 at an integer point, it's a composite,
where they don't intersect x = 0 at some integer point, it's a prime.

It's called the "quadratic sieve".

Still trying to figure out a "proof" of that.