4 ms·
A discovery about prime numbers and what it means for the future of math (2013)
- akbarnama 12y agoAnother article which talks about this - http://www.simonsfoundation.org/quanta/20130519-unheralded-mathematician-bridges-the-prime-gap/ http://www.simonsfoundation.org/quanta/20130519-unheralded-m...
- huhtenberg 12y agoThat's a much better read. Thanks!
- mappu 12y agoHN discussion from 500 days ago - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5703219 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5703219 What has changed since then?
- chrisbennet 12y agoWell, Zhang announced his findings this month (Sept 2014). Yitang “Tom” Zhang, a popular math professor at the University of New Hampshire, stunned the world of pure mathematics this month when he announced that he had proven the “bounded gaps” conjecture about the distribution of prime numbers.
- gojomo 12y agoThat's false. His announcement was April 2013, with paper accepted in May 2013. This site, impactlab.net, has simply plagiarized an old article from Slate and put a new date on it.
- ch 12y agoSo does this mean that the primes actually distribute based on some pseudo random pattern? Certainly that is trivializing things but is this what the notion of the numbers acting random, but clearly not being random implies?
- lutusp 12y ago> So does this mean that the primes actually distribute based on some pseudo random pattern? To prove this, we would have to identify the hypothetical pseudorandom pattern. If we successfully identified the pattern, we could locate primes deterministically. If we could locate primes deterministically, modern encryption would collapse. So ... no. No one knows how primes are distributed among composites, and there may be no pattern, as that term is generally understood. > Certainly that is trivializing things but is this what the notion of the numbers acting random, but clearly not being random implies? Yes, but with the important distinction that a pseudorandom pattern can be recreated, given the genesis of the pattern. For example, a pseudorandom number generator will produce exactly the same pseudorandom numbers for a given initializing "seed" number. As to the primes, it's possible that their placement among the composites obeys a pattern, but we don't know what that pattern is, and this is a matter of great mathematical interest.
- gojomo 12y agoText appears to be a cut & paste of Slate's article on the topic from May 2013: http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/do_the_math/2013/05/yitang_zhang_twin_primes_conjecture_a_huge_discovery_about_prime_numbers.single.html http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/do_the_math... (They include a link to Slate at the bottom, but no hint they've cut & pasted the entire text as if it were their own with the new September 24, 2014 publication date.)
- theoh 12y agoFrom the article "The gaps between successive powers of 2 grow exponentially, and there are finitely many gaps of any given size; once you get past 16, for instance, you will never again see two powers of 2 separated by a gap of size 15 or less." Unless I am mistaken, the gaps between powers of two never repeat. They keep getting bigger by a factor of two each time, right?
- x1798DE 12y agoGaps are 2^n-2^(n-1) = 2^(n-1)*(2-1) = 2^(n-1) So yeah, the gaps are just powers of 2.
- nkurz 12y agoThis is a wonderful article, but the blog spam URL should be changed to the original: http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/do_the_math/2013/05/yitang_zhang_twin_primes_conjecture_a_huge_discovery_about_prime_numbers.html http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/do_the_math... "Impact Lab" has scraped the entire 5-month old article from it's original publication, and republished it verbatim with their own ads on it. While they link to original at the bottom of the full article (no mention on the teaser page), this is egregious copyright infringement. This appears to be their entire business model: http://www.impactlab.net/impact-lab-advertising-rate-sheet/ http://www.impactlab.net/impact-lab-advertising-rate-sheet/ HN should ban them. Slate (and the other infringed parties) should sue them out of existence. It should be an open-and-shut case.