MHB Showcase of 2016 Consecutive Numbers w/ 100 Primes

kaliprasad
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
1,333
Reaction score
0
Show that there exists 2016 consecutive numbers that contains exactly 100 primes.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
kaliprasad said:
Show that there exists 2016 consecutive numbers that contains exactly 100 primes.

My solution

we know that number of primes less than 1000 is $= 168$
Now let f(x) be number of primes in a sequence of 2016 primes starting at x.
$f(1) > 100$.
now when we move to next number the number of primes increases/decreases by 1 or remains unchanged
$f(2017!+2) = 0$ as 2016 numbers starting from this number all are composite
So from 1 going upto 2017!+2 the starting number ( $>100$) remains unchanged or increases by 1 or decreases by 1
going to 0.
Hence at some point it is 100.
 
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...
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...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
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...
Back
Top