Cornman

@RobArthan I think what you are trying to say is that there are true statements that can not be proven.

@Lubin Gödel showed that there are true statements that can not be proven. :)

Thank you Curl. I appreciate your comment!

What ever bothers you at the moment, I wish you nothing but the best for your future. ^-^ Cheers.

xD you didnt fix only typos, but added whole paragraphs to your comments.

With associativity comes from logic, I meant that the statement $(A\wedge B)\wedge C$ is logically equivalent to $A\wedge (B\wedge C)$. And this can be proven and then comes into account in the prove of the set associativity. Yes. So what exactly is now wrong with my answer above?

Also it is very hard to argue with someone who always edits his comments, before my comment is finished.

Thank you that you stop harassing me for your misunderstanding of my answer above, and the linked wikipedia article.

No, you have not said that. The associativity of the logical operator $\wedge$ is also something that can be proven and is not some sort of axiom, or what ever you are trying to argue. I also dont understand what you mean with "You havent proven anything". My answer is supposed to give a guidline on what there is to do, and not a proof.

I dont get what you are trying to say. Are you treating associativity of sets as some sort of axiom or definition? You have to prove it. This has nothing to do with "nuclear bomb fly" or what ever you are trying to imply with that. It is a property of sets that has to be proven. Check Section 4 of Halmos for example. He stats all the properties of your linked wikipedia article as "easily proved facts". I do not know what you are trying to say here. Honestly, you are just wrong.

The associativity comes from logic.

What should I understand? The linked article lists a bunch of of properties? So what? Still have to prove them.

I still dont understand. You have to prove a rule to use it, no?

I dont understand. Associativity of intersection is to prove here? I know that this is a dube, but I still think that my answer helps the TS better. It is more personal.

I want to find someone who is interested in learning algebraic geometry, or wants to tutor me in this topic. In the last case I am willing to pay. Feel free to contact me.

For interested readers, the chat can be found here. chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/126929/…

I joined the other chat, lets discuss there.

Hello, as I said I am interested, but I might lack some prerequisites. I am also from germany. Maybe we can also use the german forum "matheplanet.de", where you can join workgroups (Arbeitsgruppen) and use an intern forum. This might be easier and clearer then a shared document. When other students are interested we can also discuss in english.

I would like to crank up my studies and get in touch with mathematical researchers, and the oppertunity to work on a project myself to get a glimps of mathematical research and practice in writing a thesis.

Looks interesting. But I can not say anything about it.

But I can not tell.

I think this is a valid conjecture to ask if there are an infinite amount of primes satisfying this equation. But it looks at least as difficult to the twin prime conjecture.

Well, I think I can not help you with this question, as you have asked for other examples. I can not provide a programm. But certainly this will be a tough question to answer, as most questions about such identities are pretty hard to solve.

Ok, so you want prime numbers $q$ that satisfy the equation $(2p+1)^2+(p+1)=q$ for some other prime $p$.

This equation makes still no sense. The LHS is clearly greater then the RHS.

As I said, in that case you always have to assume that $b=2$. Else you get "odd + odd = even" so there is kind off no chance.

Well, the sum of two primes is always even (except one prime is 2). So it kind off can never hold (except one prime number is assumed to be 2). Do you mean different primes in this equation? $(2a+1)^2+b=c$ where $a,b,c$ are prime? Else this will always fail.

This can not be true. It is $(2p+1)^2>0$, so the LHS can never equal the RHS. Edit: Is your question which prime numbers $p$ satisfy that $(2p+1)^2+p$ is an other prime $q$?

Hello, I just "answered" this question, and I am positive, that my answer is not correct. I want to solve the integral, and bring attention to it. math.stackexchange.com/questions/2996487/…

Where does this question come from? Which book is this picture taken from?

@TeresaLisbon Thanks for your thoughts.

.... with random thoughts to get the question fullfulling the "not PSQ". This is just annoying to work with, as it is very hard to work through wrong and unsorted thoughts, or guesses. As I said, most answers given in the past would just ignore the efforts in the startingpost anyways, and give a solution to the stated problem. So why not just state the problem in the first place, when there is no difference. It is just a more efficient time managment for everybody.

@TeresaLisbon My comment was more of general and not connected to the question which started it. I agree that a question should be as clear as possible and give all the context it needs. I just dislike that the new policy just leads to more discussion in comments, just for someone to join later and give a full answer anyways, which is very unsatisfying for the ones involved into deeper discussion. As I said you do not have to tools to discuss deeply here. The restricted characters in the comments are very annoying. Also I just "forces" people searching for help, to blow-up their questions ....

As you know, I do not mind PSQs. The reason is that most answers to not PSQs are ITEOTTAA (Ignoring The Efforts Of the TE Anyways Answers). This side is not build to go into a deep discussion with someone having a question. It was never meant to be this way. This is a question-answer website. You ask a questions, and someone gives an answer. I still dont get why out of the sudden this has to be changed. Just kills the fun for everybody. :(

Yes, it is obviously much easier to decide for which answers you should bann a user. :) Besides that I am pretty sure that it is incredibly easy to disable reputation gain on questions which got closed. Regarding the "not" .... I was sarcastic.

I do not understand your comment.

@quid If you think that this suggestions is "incredibly naive" thats up to you, but no need to personally attack me, with such a negative word. And that I do not take this website seriously is completly obvious from my reputation score, questions with high formating effort, and answers to question I always to my best to be helpful. I am not going to discuss with you anymore over this.

@CalvinKhor No, I noticed that post, but honestly never have read it all the way through.

"A volunteer fire department is not there for entertainment either." Obviously you can have/enjyo a hobby and take it seriously at the same time... Noone is getting paid here. Everyone is here because he enjoys mathematics.

Well, you have to view this with a winked eye of course. Also "this website is not here for your entertainment" is a bold statement, as everyone here does this because he gets some kind of joy out of it of course. I am here to learn from asking questions and answering questions. I am not here to think about "how do I find the dublicate to this question" or to ask myself if I am allowed to answer this or that question because of some odd "quality restriction", which just encourages blown-up questions which at the end do not say more then "please help me find a solution".

I dont deny that. My statement is: Everyone is here because he enjoys it. If it is not enjoyable for users to be at the site anymore, then you see how far this gets you. I am not predicting the end of math.stackexchange. It is also just a fact, and these ominous rules, and unexpected banns for answering questions, which I am sure of, is something many users are not aware of that this happens right now, is sucking the joy out of this website for sure. You can enforce quality standards in other ways. Maybe a starting point would be to disable reputation gain on low-quality posts.

@Yorch Considering the fact that you are close to 100k reputation at the math.stackexchange, it is just disrespectful regarding the time and effort you have put into this website for answering a question that is a dublicate, and bann you for it.

@quid Why? That I am not willing to discuss, or because of something else? I am not going to discuss the points because it is just pointless to do so. The reason I posted this is to get some awareness of what can get you banned at this state of the site, and banning users for answering questions, is simply toxic.

Also my main point is that banning me for 24 hours for answering the linked questions above, where I deleted two myself, is just insane.

@ArcticChar I included the massage from the moderation team. The reason was "violation of rules" not "cool down". Also the comment the moderation team refered to was completly harmless and just a little childish from myside, which was (I admit) intentional. The comment was adressed to the user fleablood, so maybe he can answer from first person how he thought about that comment, which I can not link, or quote.

I am not going to discuss over my statements in my post above. If there are some statistics about the number of views the questions get here, I would be interested in seeing them. Just to say that, roughly 90% (probably about 99%) of questions and answers here, are complete trash in the sense of "quality". Take me for example. One quality post ouf off 300. :( The truth hurts, but I am not that good of a mathematician yet. And eventually when I am good enough I will imigrate to mathoverflow, as everybody else. Just let me have some fun.

Hello, I wanted to ask the fellow math students, and preferably researchers on how a "mathematical day" should look like. I have always the feeling that I can not find a good balance between solving exercises, studying lecture notes, studying from books and so on. Especially when I attempt a problem and can not figure it out, I often feel like I would have been better off just attempting easier exercises or study more from the books, to advance.

Is it possible to find a mentor on this website, who is interested in "keeping track" of my progress in a certain field? Do not want to ask this on the meta, because it will be closed anyways, but maybe someone with the necessary expertise is reading. :)

When a prime $p$ divides a product $xy$ it is either $p|x$ or $p|y$.

@MartinSleziak I have no intention to ruin your effort. And yes, I am aware of the "follow a post" option. Since I am the only person with this issue, I will leave it as it is and accept that my memory fooled me on this one. Best regards. Keep up the good work!