How does the prime number algorithm determine if a number is prime or not?

  • Thread starter Thread starter split
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Algorithm Prime
split
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
When trying to determine whether a number is prime or not, the following algorithm is often used: Test all numbers up to [sqrt[n]] ([x] is the ceiling of x) to see if any divide evenly into n. If any do, the number is not prime.

My question is, why do you only have to test up to [sqrt[n]]? How does that work mathematically?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
If an integer n is composite, then you can factor it n=ab where a and b are both integers greater than 1. We can't have both a>sqrt(n) and b>sqrt(n), otherwise we'd get n>n. If a<=sqrt(n) then any prime dividing a (and we know there's at least one) is a prime factor of n that's less than sqrt(n). If b<=sqrt(n), we likewise get a prime factor of n less than sqrt(n). So if n is composite, it always has a prime factor <=sqrt(n), and it's enough to check these to verify whether n is composite or not.
 
Furthermore, you don't have to test every number up to the sqrt(n), just 2 and all of the odd ones.
 
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...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Back
Top