Need a check on calculating prime distributions for large values

mesa
Gold Member
Messages
694
Reaction score
36
My calculator isn't at all happy running the likely hood of finding a prime at 10,000 digits. Since there is a correlation very close to 1/2 the number of primes for each increase of 1000 digits after 1000 digits I was thinking I could just use,

1/2^(n/1000)×1151.3 = probability of finding a prime for n # of digits

This doesn't work at all for a small number of digits but I am only concerned about gigantic primes and above. Anyone have an idea to about how many digits this function will be accurate?
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Prime number theorem
For numbers around a large number N, approximately 1/ln(N) of those numbers are prime.

For numbers with 10000 digits, the fraction of primes is ##\frac{1}{\ln(10^{10000}) } \approx \frac{1}{23000}##
 
mfb said:
Prime number theorem
For numbers around a large number N, approximately 1/ln(N) of those numbers are prime.

For numbers with 10000 digits, the fraction of primes is ##\frac{1}{\ln(10^{10000}) } \approx \frac{1}{23000}##

Okay so the function I wrote is bunk :)

Where did I get a calculator that can handle the ln10^10000?
 
mfb said:

It sure can, thanks for the link!

Alternatively, use log rules: ln(1010000)=10000*ln(10).

Realized that right after I left to get my kids. Brain back-logged :)
 
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.

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
8K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
36
Views
243
Back
Top