Arbirtary Extraction of Primes - From Ideal Fractal(s)?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Sinsearach
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Extraction Primes
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of extracting prime numbers through the lens of fractal equations, particularly in relation to prime gaps. Participants explore the potential for a fractal representation of prime gaps and the implications of such a model, while also referencing existing literature on prime gaps.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that a fractal equation could describe prime gaps at maximum resolution and proposes the idea of extending this to an nth-dimensional fractal for primes.
  • Another participant expresses confusion regarding the initial proposal and seeks clarification, referencing a Wikipedia article on prime gaps.
  • Some participants note the existence of a curve plot of maximal gaps found in the Wikipedia article, but there is contention regarding the concept of a maximal gap.
  • One participant asserts that there is no maximal gap, while another references a proof suggesting an absolute maximum gap, leading to further discussion on the nature of prime gaps.
  • It is mentioned that there are infinitely many pairs of prime numbers with gaps of size less than 70 million, but uncertainty remains about the existence of gaps of size 2 and other specific sizes.
  • Participants discuss the distinction between maximal gaps for primes smaller than a certain number and the absence of an absolute maximal gap, indicating the complexity of the topic.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit disagreement regarding the existence of maximal gaps in prime numbers, with some asserting there is no absolute maximal gap while others reference proofs that suggest otherwise. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing views on the nature of prime gaps.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various mathematical proofs and articles, but there are limitations in the assumptions made about the nature of prime gaps and the definitions used in the discussion.

Sinsearach
At a sufficient resolution, such as mapping every knowing prime gap...
Could a fractal equation created to perfectly describe this (at max possible res.):
http://techn.ology.net/the-density-plot-of-the-prime-gaps-is-a-fractal/

Likewise clear a path to a nth-dimensional fractal for prime gaps and then... primes?

Yes I know I'm way out of my depth here, which is why I am asking.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
fresh_42 said:
I have no idea what you are talking about. Do you mean this plot here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_gap?

ah yes i should have remembered that
now i recall coming across that a few weeks ago
also noticed the easily observed curve plot of maximal gaps as charted 1/4 the way down that WP article
 
Sinsearach said:
ah yes i should have remembered that
now i recall coming across that a few weeks ago
also noticed the easily observed curve plot of maximal gaps as charted 1/4 the way down that WP article
There is no maximal gap.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_gap#Simple_observations
 
... there are infinitely many pairs of prime numbers that differ by 70 million or less ...
This doesn't mean all. There are still gaps of size ##N \in \mathbb{N}## for all ##N##. We don't even know, if there infinitely many pairs of prime numbers that differ by ##2##. There are various upper and lower bounds for the ##n-##th gap.
 
There is a maximal gap for primes smaller than N. There is no absolute maximal gap anywhere.
Sinsearach said:
But note this proof that apparently shows a absolute maximum gap:
It makes a statement about how often small gaps are. It doesn't make any statement about larger gaps.
There is an infinite set of gaps smaller than 70 million and also an infinite set of gaps larger than that.

fresh_42 said:
This doesn't mean all. There are still gaps of size ##N \in \mathbb{N}## for all ##N##.
There is no gap of size 7, for example (unless you count a gap of size 8 as gap of size 7 as well). You probably mean ##\geq N##.
 
mfb said:
You probably mean ##\geq N##.
Sure.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
6K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • Poll Poll
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
8K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 81 ·
3
Replies
81
Views
10K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
17
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K