(Although ml algos is not ahead century tech(it's partially in some modules slightly regressed design patterns (since I dont have time(dictionary converted incorrect when I usually writing paragraph) to build emergentist systems) (wtr to latest ml technologies)) . It's not the latest ml technology but technologies it would invent would be 2 centuries ahead least compared to this century tech yet. ) so when saying ahead centuries not talking of ml algos tech design patterns which is current century math inventions and not even end of spectrum of current ml tech of this century. Since I don't have time to follow very latest design patterns in ml field. So it's having nonemergentist design methods for some modules (eg whilst emergentist design principal is kind of de facto approach of ml field current decades since people have time for emergentism unlike our project schedule )
ok then the continuation of Goldbach proof: second part logic were wrong (in second blog of goldbach conjecture proof) that if there is none prime from C1 equivalence class, that means number should be like: 2n / 2 = n and 2n being always less than n! makes this such number be improbable. unless number is less than value that enables C1 at most 1 more element than 1 element set, then in such case still then Goldbach conjecture wouold be true e.g. 2*3 in that case. and any more than 1 element in C1 equivalence class results of problem being considered for the solution part where there are more than 1 elements in C1 equivalence class. So Goldbach conjecture is true for every number is the conclusion yep.
Yorumlar
Yorum Gönder