Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines

ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

A Mersenne prime, like math in general, is not a law of nature | 267 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

A Mersenne prime, like math in general, is not a law of nature

Authored by: Tolerance on Saturday, February 09 2013 @ 08:34 PM EST

Do please ask a mathematician, if one is available, whether
a Mersenne prime - or indeed something simpler, like a whole
number - is a law of nature. It's an odds-on bet that his or
her answer will be "no".

Those of a religious bent tend to think of some fundamental
Maths as the work of God, like Kronecker, who infamously
declared that "God made the whole numbers: all else is the
work of man". But they are a minority. Still others place
mathematical laws prior to, and independent of, nature -
numbers existed before the big bang, sort of thing.

But most I have asked tend to think of such things simply as
creations of a mind, like other forms of art. Laws they may
be. Of nature, they are not. Thus, by the criteria of the
supreme court, they are patentable.

I guarantee you when pushed into a corner that is how
Congress will be paid to vote, and the courts will attempt
to give effect to the will of Congress.

---
Grumpy old man

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

A Mersenne prime, like math in general, is not a law of nature - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 09 2013 @ 11:03 PM EST
- Yes, well done - Authored by: Tolerance on Saturday, February 09 2013 @ 11:11 PM EST
  - Yes, well done - Authored by: dio gratia on Sunday, February 10 2013 @ 04:00 PM EST
    - Exactly - Authored by: Tolerance on Sunday, February 10 2013 @ 05:15 PM EST
  - Number and method - Authored by: Tolerance on Sunday, February 10 2013 @ 05:43 PM EST
Still Abstract - Authored by: OpenSourceFTW on Sunday, February 10 2013 @ 01:53 PM EST
- I would love to see a patent of this type enforced. - Authored by: OpenSourceFTW on Sunday, February 10 2013 @ 01:55 PM EST
  - Maybe a gambling application? - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, February 10 2013 @ 03:54 PM EST
- You're right. The trick is getting the courts to agree. - Authored by: Tolerance on Sunday, February 10 2013 @ 02:16 PM EST
- numbers are NOT human constructs - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, February 10 2013 @ 03:41 PM EST
  - numbers are NOT human constructs, with reference - Authored by: IMANAL_TOO on Sunday, February 10 2013 @ 04:13 PM EST
  - Menschenwerk - Authored by: Tolerance on Sunday, February 10 2013 @ 05:01 PM EST
- Still Abstract - Authored by: cjk fossman on Sunday, February 10 2013 @ 11:13 PM EST
  - That's actually interesting and useful - Authored by: Tolerance on Monday, February 11 2013 @ 03:45 AM EST
- This is a difficult one - Authored by: Tolerance on Monday, February 11 2013 @ 12:30 AM EST
  - It just means we can't prove it either way, - Authored by: Wol on Monday, February 11 2013 @ 12:22 PM EST
    - I'd settle for a proof parts are real - Authored by: Tolerance on Monday, February 11 2013 @ 03:22 PM EST
      - I'd settle for a proof parts are real - Authored by: Wol on Tuesday, February 12 2013 @ 02:13 PM EST
Total malarkey - Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Sunday, February 10 2013 @ 10:23 PM EST
- Need a new category for that opinion - Authored by: Tolerance on Monday, February 11 2013 @ 01:25 AM EST
  - My you are grumpy, aren't you - Authored by: Wol on Monday, February 11 2013 @ 12:17 PM EST
    - The sig says it all - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, February 11 2013 @ 02:06 PM EST
- Total malarkey - Authored by: cjk fossman on Monday, February 11 2013 @ 09:50 PM EST
  - Total malarkey - Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Tuesday, February 12 2013 @ 01:18 AM EST
    - Total malarkey - Authored by: cjk fossman on Tuesday, February 12 2013 @ 01:45 PM EST

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )