Almost- and non-primes in the Ulam spiral
$begingroup$
There are lots of explanations of the preferred diagonal distribution of prime numbers in the Ulam spiral:
I wonder if these explanations can also explain the observation that when highlighting also "almost-primes" – i.e. numbers $m$ with large enough totient function $varphi(m)$ (for prime numbers $p$ we have $varphi(p) = p-1$) – a checkerboard pattern emerges:
Note that the values of $(varphi(m)+1)/m$ are indicated by different shades of gray, and only numbers $m$ with $(varphi(m)+1)/m geq 0.52$ are highlighted.
Note also, that the only numbers that disturb the visible checkerboard are
false positive: $2,4,8,16,32$ (but not $64, 128, 256$)
false negative: $105,165,195,255,285$
This is, how the spiral looks like when all numbers are displayed:
Note that – of course – also numbers $m$ with a small value of the totient function $varphi(m)$ ("almost non-primes") tend to be arranged along diagonals:
(Only $m$ with $(varphi(m)+1)/m leq 0.48$ are highlighted.)
elementary-number-theory prime-numbers visualization
asked Jan 8 at 16:21
Hans StrickerHans Stricker
6,03043886
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
There are lots of explanations of the preferred diagonal distribution of prime numbers in the Ulam spiral:
I wonder if these explanations can also explain the observation that when highlighting also "almost-primes" – i.e. numbers $m$ with large enough totient function $varphi(m)$ (for prime numbers $p$ we have $varphi(p) = p-1$) – a checkerboard pattern emerges:
Note that the values of $(varphi(m)+1)/m$ are indicated by different shades of gray, and only numbers $m$ with $(varphi(m)+1)/m geq 0.52$ are highlighted.
Note also, that the only numbers that disturb the visible checkerboard are
false positive: $2,4,8,16,32$ (but not $64, 128, 256$)
false negative: $105,165,195,255,285$
This is, how the spiral looks like when all numbers are displayed:
Note that – of course – also numbers $m$ with a small value of the totient function $varphi(m)$ ("almost non-primes") tend to be arranged along diagonals:
(Only $m$ with $(varphi(m)+1)/m leq 0.48$ are highlighted.)
elementary-number-theory prime-numbers visualization
asked Jan 8 at 16:21
Hans StrickerHans Stricker
6,03043886
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
My first observation when looking at your so-called "checkerboard pattern", is that you've mostly colored the odd numbers, which obviously give that pattern.
$endgroup$
– Henrik
Jan 8 at 16:31
1
$begingroup$
Ulam spiral seems to me to be the search for patterns that do not actually exist. The main issue is : How do we even define "pattern" ?
$endgroup$
– Peter
Jan 8 at 16:38
$begingroup$
@Henrik: Thanks a lot for this hint. It gave rise to this follow-up question - let's see if an answer is given there.
$endgroup$
– Hans Stricker
Jan 9 at 10:23
$begingroup$
@Peter: I disagree. Patterns do exist and they are meaningful, as can be possibly seen here
$endgroup$
– Hans Stricker
Jan 9 at 10:24
$begingroup$
What about the definition of a "pattern" ? Can it be defined rigorously ? If not, we cannot claim that the prime numbers exhibit a pattern. We can find a (local!) structure that APPEARS to be a pattern, but when we go to larger primes, this pattern will almost surely vanish anyway.
$endgroup$
– Peter
Jan 9 at 10:37
add a comment |
$begingroup$
There are lots of explanations of the preferred diagonal distribution of prime numbers in the Ulam spiral:
I wonder if these explanations can also explain the observation that when highlighting also "almost-primes" – i.e. numbers $m$ with large enough totient function $varphi(m)$ (for prime numbers $p$ we have $varphi(p) = p-1$) – a checkerboard pattern emerges:
Note that the values of $(varphi(m)+1)/m$ are indicated by different shades of gray, and only numbers $m$ with $(varphi(m)+1)/m geq 0.52$ are highlighted.
Note also, that the only numbers that disturb the visible checkerboard are
false positive: $2,4,8,16,32$ (but not $64, 128, 256$)
false negative: $105,165,195,255,285$
This is, how the spiral looks like when all numbers are displayed:
Note that – of course – also numbers $m$ with a small value of the totient function $varphi(m)$ ("almost non-primes") tend to be arranged along diagonals:
(Only $m$ with $(varphi(m)+1)/m leq 0.48$ are highlighted.)
elementary-number-theory prime-numbers visualization
asked Jan 8 at 16:21
Hans StrickerHans Stricker
6,03043886
$endgroup$
There are lots of explanations of the preferred diagonal distribution of prime numbers in the Ulam spiral:
I wonder if these explanations can also explain the observation that when highlighting also "almost-primes" – i.e. numbers $m$ with large enough totient function $varphi(m)$ (for prime numbers $p$ we have $varphi(p) = p-1$) – a checkerboard pattern emerges:
Note that the values of $(varphi(m)+1)/m$ are indicated by different shades of gray, and only numbers $m$ with $(varphi(m)+1)/m geq 0.52$ are highlighted.
Note also, that the only numbers that disturb the visible checkerboard are
false positive: $2,4,8,16,32$ (but not $64, 128, 256$)
false negative: $105,165,195,255,285$
This is, how the spiral looks like when all numbers are displayed:
Note that – of course – also numbers $m$ with a small value of the totient function $varphi(m)$ ("almost non-primes") tend to be arranged along diagonals:
(Only $m$ with $(varphi(m)+1)/m leq 0.48$ are highlighted.)
elementary-number-theory prime-numbers visualization
elementary-number-theory prime-numbers visualization
asked Jan 8 at 16:21
Hans StrickerHans Stricker
6,03043886
asked Jan 8 at 16:21
Hans StrickerHans Stricker
6,03043886
edited Jan 8 at 16:33
Hans Stricker
asked Jan 8 at 16:21
Hans StrickerHans Stricker
6,03043886
asked Jan 8 at 16:21
Hans StrickerHans Stricker
6,03043886
asked Jan 8 at 16:21
Hans StrickerHans Stricker
6,03043886
6,03043886
1
$begingroup$
My first observation when looking at your so-called "checkerboard pattern", is that you've mostly colored the odd numbers, which obviously give that pattern.
$endgroup$
– Henrik
Jan 8 at 16:31
1
$begingroup$
Ulam spiral seems to me to be the search for patterns that do not actually exist. The main issue is : How do we even define "pattern" ?
$endgroup$
– Peter
Jan 8 at 16:38
$begingroup$
@Henrik: Thanks a lot for this hint. It gave rise to this follow-up question - let's see if an answer is given there.
$endgroup$
– Hans Stricker
Jan 9 at 10:23
$begingroup$
@Peter: I disagree. Patterns do exist and they are meaningful, as can be possibly seen here
$endgroup$
– Hans Stricker
Jan 9 at 10:24
$begingroup$
What about the definition of a "pattern" ? Can it be defined rigorously ? If not, we cannot claim that the prime numbers exhibit a pattern. We can find a (local!) structure that APPEARS to be a pattern, but when we go to larger primes, this pattern will almost surely vanish anyway.
$endgroup$
– Peter
Jan 9 at 10:37
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
My first observation when looking at your so-called "checkerboard pattern", is that you've mostly colored the odd numbers, which obviously give that pattern.
$endgroup$
– Henrik
Jan 8 at 16:31
1
$begingroup$
Ulam spiral seems to me to be the search for patterns that do not actually exist. The main issue is : How do we even define "pattern" ?
$endgroup$
– Peter
Jan 8 at 16:38
$begingroup$
@Henrik: Thanks a lot for this hint. It gave rise to this follow-up question - let's see if an answer is given there.
$endgroup$
– Hans Stricker
Jan 9 at 10:23
$begingroup$
@Peter: I disagree. Patterns do exist and they are meaningful, as can be possibly seen here
$endgroup$
– Hans Stricker
Jan 9 at 10:24
$begingroup$
What about the definition of a "pattern" ? Can it be defined rigorously ? If not, we cannot claim that the prime numbers exhibit a pattern. We can find a (local!) structure that APPEARS to be a pattern, but when we go to larger primes, this pattern will almost surely vanish anyway.
$endgroup$
– Peter
Jan 9 at 10:37
1
1
$begingroup$
My first observation when looking at your so-called "checkerboard pattern", is that you've mostly colored the odd numbers, which obviously give that pattern.
$endgroup$
– Henrik
Jan 8 at 16:31
$begingroup$
My first observation when looking at your so-called "checkerboard pattern", is that you've mostly colored the odd numbers, which obviously give that pattern.
$endgroup$
– Henrik
Jan 8 at 16:31
1
1
$begingroup$
Ulam spiral seems to me to be the search for patterns that do not actually exist. The main issue is : How do we even define "pattern" ?
$endgroup$
– Peter
Jan 8 at 16:38
$begingroup$
Ulam spiral seems to me to be the search for patterns that do not actually exist. The main issue is : How do we even define "pattern" ?
$endgroup$
– Peter
Jan 8 at 16:38
$begingroup$
@Henrik: Thanks a lot for this hint. It gave rise to this follow-up question - let's see if an answer is given there.
$endgroup$
– Hans Stricker
Jan 9 at 10:23
$begingroup$
@Henrik: Thanks a lot for this hint. It gave rise to this follow-up question - let's see if an answer is given there.
$endgroup$
– Hans Stricker
Jan 9 at 10:23
$begingroup$
@Peter: I disagree. Patterns do exist and they are meaningful, as can be possibly seen here
$endgroup$
– Hans Stricker
Jan 9 at 10:24
$begingroup$
@Peter: I disagree. Patterns do exist and they are meaningful, as can be possibly seen here
$endgroup$
– Hans Stricker
Jan 9 at 10:24
$begingroup$
What about the definition of a "pattern" ? Can it be defined rigorously ? If not, we cannot claim that the prime numbers exhibit a pattern. We can find a (local!) structure that APPEARS to be a pattern, but when we go to larger primes, this pattern will almost surely vanish anyway.
$endgroup$
– Peter
Jan 9 at 10:37
$begingroup$
What about the definition of a "pattern" ? Can it be defined rigorously ? If not, we cannot claim that the prime numbers exhibit a pattern. We can find a (local!) structure that APPEARS to be a pattern, but when we go to larger primes, this pattern will almost surely vanish anyway.
$endgroup$
– Peter
Jan 9 at 10:37
add a comment |
0
active
oldest
votes
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3066380%2falmost-and-non-primes-in-the-ulam-spiral%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3066380%2falmost-and-non-primes-in-the-ulam-spiral%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
$begingroup$
My first observation when looking at your so-called "checkerboard pattern", is that you've mostly colored the odd numbers, which obviously give that pattern.
$endgroup$
– Henrik
Jan 8 at 16:31
1
$begingroup$
Ulam spiral seems to me to be the search for patterns that do not actually exist. The main issue is : How do we even define "pattern" ?
$endgroup$
– Peter
Jan 8 at 16:38
$begingroup$
@Henrik: Thanks a lot for this hint. It gave rise to this follow-up question - let's see if an answer is given there.
$endgroup$
– Hans Stricker
Jan 9 at 10:23
$begingroup$
@Peter: I disagree. Patterns do exist and they are meaningful, as can be possibly seen here
$endgroup$
– Hans Stricker
Jan 9 at 10:24
$begingroup$
What about the definition of a "pattern" ? Can it be defined rigorously ? If not, we cannot claim that the prime numbers exhibit a pattern. We can find a (local!) structure that APPEARS to be a pattern, but when we go to larger primes, this pattern will almost surely vanish anyway.
$endgroup$
– Peter
Jan 9 at 10:37