Re: Prime numbers, my find, and discovery

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 06:03:06 -0800, James Harris wrote:

> David C. Ullrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>> On 1 Dec 2003 19:13:39 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (James Harris) wrote:
>> 
>> >I should be a rather happy guy.  After all, over 18 months ago I found
>> >this partial difference equation I call dS(x,y), and the sum of dS
>> >from dS(x,2) to dS(x,sqrt(x)) is the count of primes up to and
>> >including x.
>> >
>> >Afer talking with mathematicians all over the world by email and
>> >Usenet, and searching math references, both bought and on the
>> >Internet, I know that I have a first-find.
>> >
>> >Somehow, I am the first human being in recorded human history to find
>> >a partial difference equation that sums to give the count of prime
>> >numbers.  
>> 
>> Not true. Won't become true through repetition. See
>> 
>> http://mathworld.wolfram.com/LegendresFormula.html
>> 
> 
> Are you saying David Ullrich that what's shown at the link you provide
> is a partial difference equation that sums to give the count of prime
> numbers?
>


if he isn't i will. did you read the damn page? it does note that it is an
inefficient way to compute \pi(n). 

<snip>