A question on palindromic primes

  • Thread starter Thread starter Char. Limit
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Primes
Char. Limit
Gold Member
Messages
1,222
Reaction score
23
So just for fun, I decided to look for a list of palindromic primes, that is, primes that when in base 10 representation are the same whether backward or forward. 1003001, just to give an example. I quickly noticed something striking: Other than 11, every palindromic prime out of the first 100,000 primes had an odd number of digits! Naturally, I wondered just why this was, but not being a number theorist, I cannot for the life of me figure out why without help.

So with that, I must ask: Can you help me understand just why 4 and 6 digit palindromic numbers, as a rule, are composite? Does a reason even exist in the first place? And finally, can a proof be made to show that 11 is the only even-digited palindromic prime?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Borek said:

Haha, whoops. Shame on me indeed. If I'm allowed an excuse, I'd like to put forth the one that says I'm on mobile.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top