Are prime numbers truly random or is there a hidden pattern?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the nature of prime numbers and whether they exhibit randomness or hidden patterns. An article is referenced that suggests a potential pattern in the distribution of primes, but skepticism is expressed regarding its mathematical validity. The conversation highlights the complexity of proving any consistent patterns, particularly in relation to the Riemann Conjecture, which remains unresolved despite interest from physicists. It is noted that while primes may appear random, they can be shown to possess a level of randomness akin to that of a random set of natural numbers. The participants emphasize the importance of careful interpretation of claims regarding patterns in prime numbers.
Imparcticle
Messages
572
Reaction score
4
Here is a cool article about a pattern to the procession of prime numbers:

http://www.nature.com/nsu/030317/030317-13.html

Enjoy! :smile:
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I could be wrong but surely this could never stand up as serious mathematics. There being an infinite number of primes trying to spot how likely differences are is surely like trying to spot how likely the digit 7 occurs in Pi in base 10...
 
Well, if Reinmann decided to make a conjecture about the randomness of prime numbers, and it is taken seriously, then I am sure it is a serious kind of mathematics. Also, I believe the seriousness of a subject is subjective.
 
As with a lot of popular science articles on mathematics it omits many details and gives a false impression. If I were a number theorist I'd be vaguely bemused at the 'hey look you guys, *physicists* can do it, why can't you' feeling in it. As anyone who knows about the recent interest in the zeta function will tell you, it is high'y unlikely that any number theory techniques extant will solve the Riemann Conjecture, and it is felt that physicists may have the most important input (quantum chaotical systems and random matrices, perhaps). This is not new or surprising. What is surprising is that Physics has had so little input in pure mathematics in the last 80 years compared to the previous few thousand.

And it is not true, in some sense, to say that the primes are not random, as we can prove a statement that says, in effect, that they are as random as you get, and that any statement that is true for a *random* (in a carefully stated sense) set of natural numbers is true of the primes.

Anyway, Zurtex, this area is an important one.
 
How carefully did you read the article? The people quoted do not claim they have found a pattern. They say they have found what looks like a pattern. They certainly do not claim to have proved that that pattern will always be true. I suspect that such a proof would be as difficult as proving all of the other possible patterns in prime numbers.
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
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...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
23
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Back
Top