Quote:Contrary to what just about every mathematician on Earth will tell you, prime numbers can be predicted, according to researchers at City University of Hong Kong (CityUHK) and North Carolina State University, U.S.

Caught my attention anyway..

Wait, was this an April fools joke.

Quote:rxwineQuote:Contrary to what just about every mathematician on Earth will tell you, prime numbers can be predicted, according to researchers at City University of Hong Kong (CityUHK) and North Carolina State University, U.S.

Caught my attention anyway..

Wait, was this an April fools joke.

link to original post

maybe the primes problem can be done with quantum computers...

The 2 major cicada cycles are prime numbers

13 and 17 years

This year is the rare occurrence they will emerge in the same year

last time was 1803.

Another 221 years till they emerger together again

Quote:WizardWho was the original quote from?

link to original post

It's from here probably:

https://phys.org/news/2024-04-breakthrough-prime-theory-primes.html

Which links to this paper:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4742238

If true, predictability of primes could have huge implications for science and tech.

The paper is certainly not an April Fool's joke. I skimmed through it and only understand the kernel of the argument. I don't even understand the graphs and what is being mirrored.Quote:WizardThe paper itself was a bit much for me to absorb at this late hour. Please keep me updated on developments.

link to original post

What is clear to me is that the paper makes quite a few testable predictions. Anyone working in the field should be able to verify the results quickly if they are correct. Heck, since it was a large team several people on the team should have been able to poke holes in it if it was not mostly correct.

I never understood why prime numbers should not have more structure. If the structure was hiding there in plain sight, this team is going to get a lot o fame.

I haven’t had a chance to look at this paper and from the sounds of it, I likely wouldn’t be able to follow the math anyway.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a60427695/prime-numbers-study-controversy/

(N + 1)! + 2 through (N + 1)! + N + 1

Okay, there are an infinite number of such sets, as (N + 1 + K)! + 2 through (N + 1 + K)! + N + 1 + K are consecutive and nonprime, which means any subset of N consecutive numbers in that set (e.g. (N + 1 + K)! + 2 through (N + 1 + K)! + N + 1) is also a set of N consecutive nonprime numbers

Quote:ThatDonGuyPrime numbers can't be that predictable - after all, for every positive integer N, there exists at least one set of N consecutive nonprime numbers:

(N + 1)! + 2 through (N + 1)! + N + 1

Okay, there are an infinite number of such sets, as (N + 1 + K)! + 2 through (N + 1 + K)! + N + 1 + K are consecutive and nonprime, which means any subset of N consecutive numbers in that set (e.g. (N + 1 + K)! + 2 through (N + 1 + K)! + N + 1) is also a set of N consecutive nonprime numbers

link to original post

I like palindromic primes like 10^1888529 - 10^944264 - 1.

I read the article but.........Quote:unJonPopular Mechanics has a short article on this paper, which seems to hit the nail on the head. It’s either nonsense or sense explained in a nonsense way.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a60427695/prime-numbers-study-controversy/

link to original post

I will give odds of 100 to 1. This theory/idea/illusion will not be proved or semi proved in the next year. I will take up to $10 from any credible member.