Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #562748

Re: Mathematician pair find prime numbers aren't as random as thought

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 3/15/2016 6:16 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
> Mathematician pair find prime numbers aren't as random as thought
>> http://phys.org/news/2016-03-mathematician-pair-prime-random-thought.html
>
>> (Phys.org)—A pair of mathematicians with Stanford University has
>> found that the distribution of the last digit of prime numbers are
>> not as random as has been thought, which suggests prime's themselves
>> are not. In their paper uploaded to the preprint server arXiv, Robert
>> Lemke Oliver and Kannan Soundararajan describe their study of the
>> last digit in prime numbers, how they found it to be less than
>> random, and what they believe is a possible explanation for their
>> findings.
>>
>
>
> Unexpected biases in the distribution of consecutive primes
>> http://arxiv.org/abs/1603.03720
>
>> While the sequence of primes is very well distributed in the reduced
>> residue classes (mod q), the distribution of pairs of consecutive
>> primes among the permissible ϕ(q)2 pairs of reduced residue classes
>> (mod q) is surprisingly erratic. This paper proposes a conjectural
>> explanation for this phenomenon, based on the Hardy-Littlewood
>> conjectures. The conjectures are then compared to numerical data, and
>> the observed fit is very good.
>

Hi,

I think this might have a simple explanation, for each prime n,
with corresponding prime density (based on magnitude of n),
there will be a point x, where the next prime is statistically
most likely to occur, and for all odd numbers ending in 1,3,7,9
around the point x and greater than n, they have a statistical
likelihood of being the next prime based on their distance from x.

So if for every prime that calculation is done, maybe the statistics
will even out and show that consecutive primes ending in 7 occur
less frequently etc, since there are other possible prime closer to
x than 7's are.

Thoughts?

cheers,
Jamie

Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Mathematician pair find prime numbers aren't as random as thought Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-03-15 20:16 -0500
  Re: Mathematician pair find prime numbers aren't as random as thought "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-03-15 18:46 -0700
    Re: Mathematician pair find prime numbers aren't as random as thought Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-03-16 10:02 +0000
      Re: Mathematician pair find prime numbers aren't as random as thought "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-03-16 10:24 -0700
  Re: Mathematician pair find prime numbers aren't as random as thought Jamie M <jmorken@shaw.ca> - 2016-03-15 19:50 -0700
    Re: Mathematician pair find prime numbers aren't as random as thought noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-03-16 14:11 -0700
  Re: Mathematician pair find prime numbers aren't as random as thought David Bernier <david250@videotron.ca> - 2016-03-16 19:02 -0400
    Re: Mathematician pair find prime numbers aren't as random as thought The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-03-16 23:38 -0800

csiph-web