Can I Name My Prime Series After Myself?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Sariaht
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Prime
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers around the proposal to name a prime series the "EO-equation" after its discoverer, Sariaht. The mathematical expressions discussed involve the series 1/2 + 1/3 + ... + 1/pa and 1/2 + 2/3 + ... + (a-1)/pa, both of which diverge as a approaches infinity. The conversation highlights the use of modulus notation, specifically "mod1", and clarifies its acceptance in mathematical contexts. Participants engage in a debate about the implications of divergence and the validity of the proposed naming convention.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of prime numbers and their properties
  • Familiarity with series and convergence/divergence concepts
  • Knowledge of modulus notation in mathematics
  • Basic skills in mathematical proofs and notation
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the properties of prime number series and their applications
  • Study the concepts of convergence and divergence in mathematical series
  • Learn about modulus operations and their notation in mathematical contexts
  • Explore the implications of naming conventions in mathematical discoveries
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, number theorists, and students interested in prime number theory and mathematical notation. This discussion is particularly beneficial for those exploring the intersection of mathematical discovery and nomenclature.

Sariaht
Messages
356
Reaction score
0
This is strange... I can sort of proove this.

( n(1/2 + 1/3 + ... + 1/pa) - (1/3 + 2/5 + ... + (a-1)/pa) minus all whole queries ) <= ½

--> n = p

If it's true and I was the first to find the serie; can I name it after me?

In that case i would like to name my equation the EO-equation.


But pa is the last existing prime between the two numbers 1 and n.

Thereby it's a bit difficult to find really big primes, but anyway.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Originally posted by Sariaht
This is strange... I can sort of proove this.

mod1( n(1/2 + 1/3 + ... + 1/pa) - (1/2 + 2/3 + 3/5 + ... + (a-1)/pa) ) <= ½

I must say that I don't really understand what you are trying to say.

What do you mean with mod1( ... )?

By the way, are you aware that both the series 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/5 + ... + 1/pa and the series 1/2 + 2/3 + 3/5 + ... + (a-1)/pa diverge in the limit to infinity? Actually, the second series diverges considerably faster, so the total series ( n(1/2 + 1/3 + ... + 1/pa) - (1/2 + 2/3 + 3/5 + ... + (a-1)/pa) ) goes to -\infty in the limit a\rightarrow\infty...
 
I ment modulus.

mod1(23.5) = .5


If the first prime is two, how ever you think, the risk is fifty fifty for the next two primes to have a factor two.

If the risk is higher than... Well I can't explain it without a new small numbertheory
 
Last edited:


Originally posted by suyver
I must say that I don't really understand what you are trying to say.

What do you mean with mod1( ... )?



modulus 12.34 = .34

(Am I not right in this?)

Anyway what i ment was everything after the dot in tu.vxyz...

So .342563448 in 23.342563448 is modulus 23.342563448.
 


Originally posted by suyver
I must say that I don't really understand what you are trying to say.

What do you mean with mod1( ... )?

By the way, are you aware that both the series 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/5 + ... + 1/pa and the series 1/2 + 2/3 + 3/5 + ... + (a-1)/pa diverge in the limit to infinity? Actually, the second series diverges considerably faster, so the total series ( n(1/2 + 1/3 + ... + 1/pa) - (1/2 + 2/3 + 3/5 + ... + (a-1)/pa) ) goes to -\infty in the limit a\rightarrow\infty...


The n don't cover the second serie, it only covers the first.

Change sign on -\infty
 
Last edited:


Originally posted by Sariaht
the n don't cover the second serie, it only covers the first.

But the first series diverges for n->oo! If you won't take the limit in the second series as well, then the result will just be +oo.

Originally posted by Sariaht
Change sign on -\infty
I do not understand this.

Anyway: can't you just give an example with the first 10 (or so) primes?
 


Originally posted by Sariaht
modulus 12.34 = .34

(Am I not right in this?)


Edit: I have been informed that this is an accepted notation (see below).
 
Last edited:


Originally posted by suyver

Sorry, I was wrong.

Good try anyway.

Good night Erik-Olof Wallman
 
Last edited:
Actually, I've seen "mod 1" used in this way somewhat frequently.
 
  • #10
Originally posted by Hurkyl
Actually, I've seen "mod 1" used in this way somewhat frequently.

Thank you, I stand corrected. (I had never seen it.)
 
  • #11
Suyver, note that in the original post it was "mod1()". That might be more often written "( ) mod(1)" but the notation is perfectly reasonable.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
744
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K