Timeline for Approximate number of primes below a given integer?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 10, 2013 at 20:20 | comment | added | Kaveh | @Joël, unregistered users cannot edit their own posts: there is no way to log into an unregistered account. The software uses a temporary cookie in the browser to remember unregistered users, however as soon as the cookie is deleted the user looses access to the account. | |
| Apr 10, 2013 at 20:07 | comment | added | Joël | Kaveh, you mean that one can not edit one's own post when we have 0 reputations ? | |
| Apr 10, 2013 at 19:58 | comment | added | Kaveh | @Barry, it seems that Alex does not have a registered account so he can't comment or edit. | |
| Apr 8, 2013 at 14:37 | comment | added | Barry Cipra | @Alex, I noticed you set up a separate account (with the same name) for your answer here. You might look into getting the two accounts merged. (You really should have edited the original question instead of posting an answer.) | |
| Apr 8, 2013 at 14:06 | comment | added | Joël | Also note of course that computing $T_a(n,\epsilon)$ for a fixed $\epsilon<1$ is equivalent to the question I asked in comment about the exact computation of $\pi(n)$. | |
| Apr 8, 2013 at 14:05 | comment | added | Joël | Alex, so if I understand well, one can formulate your question in a more open-ended way as follows: given $\epsilon>0$, what is the time $T_a(n,\epsilon)$ (resp $T_r(n,\epsilon)$) that the best known algorithm takes to compute $\pi(n)$ with an error less than $\epsilon$ (resp. less than $\epsilon \pi(n)$)? Also one can replace best known algorithm with best possible algorithm, so that makes four question. Are you more interested into what one can do right now, or what is eventually possible? The answer depends on two variables, so may be more subtle than a dichotomy polynomial/exponential. | |
| Apr 8, 2013 at 13:48 | comment | added | Joël | To Alex: I think some dark side of the human soul makes that people are even more likely to read a question if it is closed, somewhat similarly to the well-known phenomenon as people driving much slower on the highway when there has been a car accident on the other side, just to have more time to look at what happened. | |
| Apr 8, 2013 at 7:01 | comment | added | Will Sawin | Turning this around, it is not known that P$\neq$#P, so there is no way to show that one cannot get perfect accuracy in polynomial time. | |
| Apr 8, 2013 at 5:29 | history | answered | Alex | CC BY-SA 3.0 |