Slashdot Mirror


Mathematicians Discover Prime Conspiracy (quantamagazine.org)

An anonymous reader writes with an intriguing story at Quanta Magazine, which begins: Two mathematicians have uncovered a simple, previously unnoticed property of prime numbers — those numbers that are divisible only by 1 and themselves. Prime numbers, it seems, have decided preferences about the final digits of the primes that immediately follow them. Among the first billion prime numbers, for instance, a prime ending in 9 is almost 65 percent more likely to be followed by a prime ending in 1 than another prime ending in 9. In a paper posted online today, Kannan Soundararajan and Robert Lemke Oliver of Stanford University present both numerical and theoretical evidence that prime numbers repel other would-be primes that end in the same digit, and have varied predilections for being followed by primes ending in the other possible final digits. "We've been studying primes for a long time, and no one spotted this before," said Andrew Granville, a number theorist at the University of Montreal and University College London. "It's crazy."

31 of 227 comments (clear)

  1. Forget something? by ebonum · · Score: 4, Informative
    1. Re:Forget something? by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The link isn't in the summary -- but off to the right of the title.

      I've hated this "feature" of /. every since they implemented a year or so ago.

  2. 8 9 by Travis+Mansbridge · · Score: 3, Funny

    7 did it.

    1. Re:8 9 by Aighearach · · Score: 3, Funny

      One, two, few, lot, many... too many.

  3. Cut it out! by Brett+Buck · · Score: 4, Funny

    Stop anthropomorphizing prime numbers. They hate that!

    1. Re:Cut it out! by NotInHere · · Score: 5, Informative

      And stop linking to the news article only, without linking to the scientific paper. Just for those who care, here is the link: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1603.0372...

    2. Re:Cut it out! by KGIII · · Score: 3, Informative

      WTF? Why, in the name of all that's good, would they...

      Oh, I just noticed. You're still new here. *sighs*

      Look, nobody reads the article. Nobody is going to read a scientific paper. Well, a few of us might read the article (I'm not admitting to anything) but those of us who do, also know how to find the applicable paper.

      If you look at the very top post in the thread, there's someone bitching that there is no link to the article. Yet, the article link is right next to the title - where it has been for almost a year now. (They're sometimes in the summary as well. Not always.) That should tell you, they being a representative of the average one of us, how often we actually even read the article - or even look for the URL.

      They're not going to do it. The two other people who read the article know where Arxiv is. The editor would have to, you know, work. Ain't happening. Submit stories with the link included if you're passionate. 'Snot going to change in your lifetime. You're probably the 10,985,729th (see what I did there?) person to suggest that - this month.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  4. What other bases does this hold for? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Only 65%? Pft. In base 2, every prime number is 100% likely to be followed by a prime ending in 1.

    1. Re:What other bases does this hold for? by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >> In base 2, every prime number is 100% likely to be followed by a prime ending in 1

      That was kind of my thought too. Isn't the "9/1" thing kind of base 10-ist?

    2. Re:What other bases does this hold for? by ezdiy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      TFA reads like buzzfeed of number theory, when high schoolers get all excited about pop-sci.

      Cyclic groups and observable symmetries in there are well studied field. In this particular case, it's about primes projected on a modulo 10 group. There are thousands of those exhibiting various biases, yet this one is somehow exciting because it coincides with decimal base.

    3. Re:What other bases does this hold for? by SeriousTube · · Score: 5, Informative

      If you rtfa it says "Lemke Oliver and Soundararajan discovered that this sort of bias in the final digits of consecutive primes holds not just in base 3, but also in base 10 and several other bases; they conjecture that it’s true in every base. "

    4. Re:What other bases does this hold for? by slashmydots · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No joke, I just googled the exact same thing. Apparently prime numbers are prime in all bases, which I really didn't think was the case.

    5. Re:What other bases does this hold for? by chill · · Score: 3, Informative

      Why would you think that? The laws of division don't change for different base representations. Division is division no matter how you write the number.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    6. Re:What other bases does this hold for? by GrahamCox · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The base doesn't change what the number IS, only how it is written down.

    7. Re:What other bases does this hold for? by ImprovOmega · · Score: 3, Informative

      There are very few numerical properties that are base-dependent.

      Some of the little tricks they teach you in school are strictly base-dependent, like if a decimal number ends in 5 or 0 it's divisible by 5 or 10 respectively. If a decimal number ends in a value divisible by 2 it's even else odd. Or if a decimal number's digits sum to a multiple of 3 or 9 then it's divisible by 3 or 9 respectively.

      What they don't tell you is that is generalizable to other bases. Generically speaking if the final digit of a number in a given base is divisible by any factor of that base then the number itself is divisible by that factor (this should be fairly obvious) and if the digits of a number sum to a number divisible by a factor of (base-1) then that number itself is divisible by that factor (less obvious, but provable).

      So for hex, for example, the factors of 16 are 2, 4, 8, 16. If a number in base-16 ends in 0 it's obviously divisible by 16, if it ends in 8 then it's divisible by 8 and so on. The factors of (16-1)=15 are 3, 5, and 15. So if the sum of digits of a hex number are divisible by 3, 5, or 15 then the number is also divisible by 3, 5, or 15 respectively as well.

      Fun little math quirks on bases.

  5. LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    >Two mathematicians have uncovered a simple, previously unnoticed property of prime numbers — those numbers that are divisible only by 1 and themselves.

    Did anyone else LOL when they read the first sentence. My first thought was who wouldn't notice primes are only divisible by 1 and themselves it's the definition, duh.

    1. Re:LOL by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 4, Funny

      >> Did anyone else LOL when they read the first sentence.

      Yes. I initially though someone had pranked SlashDot by convincing the editors that no one knew that property of primes before. If so, that would have been the ultimate SlashDot dup - 2500 years or so in the making.

  6. Twim primes? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I wonder if this has anything to do with Twin primes. If a prime ends in 9, then its twin will end in 1, and so we should expect primes ending in 9 to more often be followed by primes ending in 1. The number of twin primes is believed to be infinite, but they get more sparse as you go towards infinity (proportional to 1/(ln(n)^2)), even faster than primes (proportional to 1/ln(n)), so if they are responsible for the bias, then the bias should diminish as you go up.

    1. Re:Twim primes? by DrJimbo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I wonder if this has anything to do with Twin primes.

      Yes, they are most likely related. Both the twin prime conjecture and these results about the final digits can be derived from the prime k-tuple conjecture. Or so says the fine article. It is not immediately obvious to me why the current result is predicted by the prime k-tuple conjecture but it does sound reasonable.

      --
      We don't see the world as it is, we see it as we are.
      -- Anais Nin
  7. That's nothing by Sun · · Score: 3, Funny

    After a prime ending in 2 or 5, there has to be at least a billion primes before another one can end in 2 or 5.

    Shachar

  8. Re:Bizarre paragraph in the linked article by BitterOak · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This seems wrong to me. Both Alice and Bob have equal chance of rolling a head, hence on average they will need the same number of tries to arrive at a head toss; and since coins dont have memory, the next toss has equal chance of being head or tail. So I do expect the chances of head head and head tail to be the same.

    Yes, it's called a veridical paradox. That's something that seems impossible but is nonetheless true. You can verify it by flipping a coin, or running a computer simulation using a good random number generator.

    --
    If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
  9. Psshh they ALL end in 1 by cfalcon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What's this base 1010 drama? Everyone knows in binary ALL primes end in "1".

    Jokes aside, the fact that there's plenty of bases to choose from means that what they are really talking about is the modulo remainders of primes having a pattern- and modulo division and primes have had a pretty flirty relationship. Unquestionably interesting. The thing with the prime number set is that it's immutable- a set of fixed numeric stars shining the same light since before time began, and yet even with that constancy, many functions involving the prime number web have proven frustrating to calculate for large values- there's hardly any shortcuts compared to the integer math you run into on a daily basis.

    1. Re:Psshh they ALL end in 1 by vrt3 · · Score: 3, Informative

      > What's this base 1010 drama? Everyone knows in binary ALL primes end in "1".

      In binary ALMOST all primes end in "1".

      --
      This sig under construction. Please check back later.
  10. Re:Bruce Schneier can factor any prime instantly! by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Funny

    Great, now he has to come up with a new one.

    Private keys are supposed to be kept secret, dammit!

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  11. Re:Waste of time by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Everyone with at least a passing interest in cryptography and computer security does. Primes is basically what we rely on in these fields.

    Quite seriously, every time someone comes up with a claim that something can be done "more easily", "more efficiently" or generally "faster" in a field that remotely touches on prime numbers, you can see the ripples in the fabric of spacetime from cryptographers shaking in their boots.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  12. Re:Bizarre paragraph in the linked article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Intuitively it makes sense. Assume the first H has been tossed. For Alice, she fails by tossing another H. However, this second H can be the first H of a successful HT sequence, so in failure there is a silver lining - she's halfway to success and can stop after tossing a single T. Full sequence: HHT.

    For Bob, after tossing the first H, tossing a T means he has to start over. He needs to toss another H first, followed by yet another H to succeed. His task is harder. Full sequence: HTHH.

  13. Re:Waste of time by GrumpySteen · · Score: 3, Insightful

    the fact that it's extremely difficult to determine the factors of large prime numbers is the basis for a lot of cryptography

    I think you might have jumbled your words.

    It's exceptionally easy to determine the factors of any large prime number because there are only two; the number one the number itself. Determining the prime factors of a large, non-prime number, on the other hand, is a challenge.

  14. Re:How about prime numbers of base 12 number? by jonhainer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The twin prime conjecture is independent of the base, so the base doesn't matter for it to be true or false.

    I would find this surprising, since in a base 2 system every prime number ending in 1 is followed by a prime number ending in 1.

  15. Re:Bizarre paragraph in the linked article by epine · · Score: 3, Funny

    You missed the absolutely critical corollary that restores balance to the force: after Bob succeeds, he's already halfway to his next success where after Alice succeeds, she needs to snooze for one toss before she's back in the game, where apparently the game involves some gender-swap role play.

    It's so totally male to cease thinking the problem through after attaining the initial success condition.

    I think I could teach a very interesting grade XI math class.

    Corollary: I would end up behind bars.

  16. 10? by fyngyrz · · Score: 4, Funny

    10 is divisible by 1,2, 5, and 10, so how is it prime?

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    1. Re:10? by burtosis · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There are 10 kinds of people who understand binary. Those who do and those who don't.