A I think I discovered a pattern for prime numbers

AI Thread Summary
A user claims to have discovered a new pattern for prime numbers and developed a program that successfully identifies all primes up to 70 million, although it crashed due to RAM limitations. They believe the pattern is unique and have not found any existing documentation on it. However, responses indicate skepticism, suggesting that the pattern aligns with established mathematical concepts, particularly the prime counting function. The discussion concludes with a warning that claims of solving significant mathematical conjectures, like the Riemann Hypothesis, are unlikely to be valid. The thread is ultimately closed due to the improbability of the user's claims fitting established mathematical formats.
hotAdaptness
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
I think I discovered a pattern for prime numbers
I wrote a program that implements the pattern and finds the primes automatically. It worked up to 70 million then it crashed because program holds data in RAM so it can be fixed. It found all the primes up to 70 million and found no exception. I won't explain the pattern because its so complicated and its not officially mine. I couldn't find any documents about this pattern and I think its a new thing. What should I do?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
hotAdaptness said:
Summary: I think I discovered a pattern for prime numbers

I wrote a program that implements the pattern and finds the primes automatically. It worked up to 70 million then it crashed because program holds data in RAM so it can be fixed. It found all the primes up to 70 million and found no exception. I won't explain the pattern because its so complicated and its not officially mine. I couldn't find any documents about this pattern and I think its a new thing. What should I do?
The pattern you have found is
$$
\pi(x) \approx \operatorname{Li}(x)=\displaystyle{\int_2^x \dfrac{dt}{\log t}}
$$

Anything else can frankly be considered wrong. See
https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/the-history-and-importance-of-the-riemann-hypothesis/
and if you are interested in details
https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/the-extended-riemann-hypothesis-and-ramanujans-sum/.

Since it is highly unlikely that you have solved the Riemann conjecture, and even if, it certainly won't fit our format, this thread is closed.
 
  • Like
Likes dextercioby
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
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...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...

Similar threads

Back
Top