[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Re: next Prime method from sci.math post
*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
*Subject*: [mg52192] Re: [mg52168] next Prime method from sci.math post
*From*: DrBob <drbob at bigfoot.com>
*Date*: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 04:30:48 -0500 (EST)
*References*: <200411130940.EAA01018@smc.vnet.net>
*Reply-to*: drbob at bigfoot.com
*Sender*: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com
Roger,
The range of your f function includes most integers (10000 of the first 10042, for instance):
Clear[f]
digits = 10000;
f[n_] := Floor[n + Log[n]^2/2]
z=f/@Range@digits;
Length@z
Through[{Min,Max}@z]
10000
{1,10042}
...so OF COURSE the range includes most primes.
That is, most primes are f[n] for some n. (Using the word "most" very loosely.)
But here's an f function that doesn't miss any at all!!!
Clear[f]
digits=10000;
f[n_]:=n
a=Rest@Union@Table[If[PrimeQ@f@n,f[n],0],{n,1,digits}];
b=Prime@Range@Length@a;
Complement[b,a]
{}
All primes fit that pattern, so I'm thinking of naming it the "Treat-Bagula prime finder function".
What do you think?
Bobby
On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 04:40:19 -0500 (EST), Roger Bagula <tftn at earthlink.net> wrote:
> I read a post several days ago that said you could find a prime between
> n and n+Log[n]^2.
> ( there also seems to be a NextPrime[] function in Mathematica that I
> wasn't aware of)
> I tried the average of the two and it works very well
> such that there are only a few primes that don't fit that pattern:
>
> (* Primes that aren't at the average of n and n+Log[n]^2 *)
> Clear[f]
> digits=10000
> f[n_]:=Floor[n+Log[n]^2/2]
> a=Delete[Union[Table[If[PrimeQ[f[n]]==True,f[n],0],{n,1,digits}]],1];
> b=Table[Prime[n],{n,1,Dimensions[a][[1]]}];
> Complement[b,a]
> {5,37,97,421,673,2659,3407,3847,7703}
> Respectfully, Roger L. Bagula
>
> tftn at earthlink.net, 11759Waterhill Road, Lakeside,Ca 92040-2905,tel: 619-5610814 :
> alternative email: rlbtftn at netscape.net
> URL : http://home.earthlink.net/~tftn
>
>
>
>
--
DrBob at bigfoot.com
www.eclecticdreams.net
Prev by Date:
**Re: TraditionalForm of expressions WITHOUT evaluating.**
Next by Date:
**Re: Re: newbie question DSolve**
Previous by thread:
**next Prime method from sci.math post**
Next by thread:
**TraditionalForm of expressions WITHOUT evaluating.**
| |