Timeline for A prime number pattern [closed]
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:19 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://math.stackexchange.com/ with https://math.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Aug 1, 2012 at 4:02 | history | closed |
Douglas Zare Ryan Budney Emil Jeřábek Henry Cohn S. Carnahan♦ |
off topic | |
| Jul 31, 2012 at 21:25 | answer | added | Esteban Crespi | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jul 30, 2012 at 16:47 | answer | added | Will Sawin | timeline score: 3 | |
| Jul 30, 2012 at 11:31 | history | edited | Furlox | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 369 characters in body
|
| Jul 30, 2012 at 5:22 | answer | added | Gerhard Paseman | timeline score: 5 | |
| Jul 29, 2012 at 15:01 | history | edited | Furlox | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
updated to reflex M.SE changes
|
| Jul 29, 2012 at 13:52 | comment | added | Furlox | This question has also been posted here.(math.stackexchange.com/questions/176394/…). Thanks to @Gerry Myerson | |
| Jul 29, 2012 at 11:12 | comment | added | Douglas Zare | @Domotorp: I don't think this is research level or close. | |
| Jul 29, 2012 at 9:20 | comment | added | Shanmukha_Srinivasan | @Domotorp : I already said that "But your question seems to be quite interesting" . Haven't you read that ? I am new to MO, I read FAQ's that said not to post any open problems or don't ask for proofs. May be I have misunderstood the norms of MO. Is that the case ? | |
| Jul 29, 2012 at 9:17 | comment | added | domotorp | @Douglas and Shanmukha: I do not understand why you guys do not support this question. Although the write up does not meet the usual standards of MO and the problem might not have applications, it is interesting and non-trivial. | |
| Jul 29, 2012 at 9:12 | answer | added | domotorp | timeline score: 4 | |
| Jul 29, 2012 at 9:03 | comment | added | Shanmukha_Srinivasan | But my sincere request to you is to come up with some heuristic argument or numerical evidence. Please post it as a journal article, and if it is potential, you can add one more open problem in Number theory ;) . My sincere and best wishes to you. | |
| Jul 29, 2012 at 9:02 | comment | added | Shanmukha_Srinivasan | Don't bother about the proof. Not all conjectures are proved. They are based upon some heuristics or some machine calculations. So if you can come up with the same pattern for some large prime $p$, then its done. 2) Along with your calculations and clear description, prepare a LaTeX file and then post it here. You can look at the naming conventions that Tao has suggested, which makes your problem attractive. You can read it here . In that he writes about the naming | |
| Jul 29, 2012 at 8:58 | comment | added | Shanmukha_Srinivasan | Dear Furlox, Welcome to MO. I think these kind of questions are not to be posted at MO ( Read FAQ's ). But your question seems to be quite interesting. You can try these things : 1) Verify the truth in your conjecture , by writing some machine code and computing the pattern for the largest number you can. Sometimes you can win, by just verifying up-to a largest number a machine can compute. $3n+1$ conjecture is widely believed for its computational truth, it has been verified for many large numbers. Contd.. | |
| Jul 29, 2012 at 8:48 | comment | added | Douglas Zare | This doesn't fit the site, but I'll give some hints. Use induction to bound the magnitude. The parity follows from considering what you are doing mod $2$. | |
| Jul 29, 2012 at 8:26 | history | asked | Furlox | CC BY-SA 3.0 |