Life In 19x19

Anyway i wrote this teacher claim perfecty precise, she said that

"There is no formula for producing n-th prime number [f(n)=n-th prime number]"

If you look at brackets you will understand what definition of formula assumed this teacher , i just only followed her assumption.

For any n you can give me the nth-prime number? No? Nough said.

Please close thread.

Question opens indeed a wide field of interest and possibilities for your curiosity, but only if you are not stopping your exploration at an uninteresting answer

Both the elementary teacher and TogetherWithEverybody provided answers that can provide insight, but only if you not missuse them as stop signs.

Thats the problem - i cant give you, i can give you formula and you after several mins (when low n) to several thousands years (when n is high) you will be able to compute it.

And there it rises one of its heads again, what about those problems that can not be solved in the time and space of our universe?

I am not intimidated by them, I embrace them.

AloneAgainstAll wrote:What complain? I didnt made any complain.

Then why talk about the fact that given the givens, you can't say anything about balls? You weren't complaining? Just making an irrelevant remark? Really?

Irrevelant is discussion about what definition of formula assumed teacher.

It was her remark we are talking about.

AloneAgainstAll wrote:Anyway i wrote this teacher claim perfecty precise, she said that

"There is no formula for producing n-th prime number [f(n)=n-th prime number]"

If you look at brackets you will understand what definition of formula assumed this teacher , i just only followed her assumption.

And you know what she assumed because???

Kirby wrote:

For instance, some people are told that you need two eyes for life.

So the teacher had better not say that!

Oh, I definitely agree.

I didn't think I needed to say that, but it looks like I might have to.

Beacause she said what is in brackets. All phrase in "..." were her words.

That was not complaint, it was stating fact.

I think you just cant admit that you were wrong - its OK, some ppl have that. If i would say that she said "there is no function f(n)=n-th prime number" you would say its true also. Its very popular belief, and the best proof for that is that everybody who claimed that teacher was right never put any doubts in that, or the form she expressed her claim. Nobody said "its true because term "formula" is not well defined" or anything close. If you want have last word that also ok, i am done with that topic.

I would like to share this formula to find the best move in any position in any game of go: (AKA the minimax algorithm).