| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | A '''prime number''' is a [[natural number]] that is divisible by only 1 and itself. The only even prime number is 2. There is no upper limit to the quantity of primes, but there is no known formula for deriving the nth prime. [[Leonhard Euler]] once commented: <blockquote> | + | A '''prime number''' is a [[natural number]] that is divisible by only 1 and itself. The first few prime numbers are 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13... |
| | + | |
| | + | [[Leonhard Euler]] wrote: <blockquote> |
| | ''Mathematicians have tried in vain to this day to discover some order in the sequence of prime numbers, and we have reason to believe that it is a mystery into which the mind will never penetrate.'' | | ''Mathematicians have tried in vain to this day to discover some order in the sequence of prime numbers, and we have reason to believe that it is a mystery into which the mind will never penetrate.'' |
| | </blockquote> | | </blockquote> |
| | | | |
| − | The number of primes smaller than a given number <math>N</math> is roughly <math>\frac{N}{\ln(N)}</math>, where <math>\ln(N)</math> is the [[natural logarithm]] (base ''[[e]]'') of <math>N</math>.<ref>http://home.att.net/~numericana/answer/primes.htm</ref> This is a formulation of a more general statement known as the [[prime number theorem]].
| + | There is no upper limit to the quantity of primes, but there is no known formula for deriving the nth prime. |
| − | | + | The only even prime number is 2. |
| − | ==The Prime Numbers==
| |
| − | The first few prime numbers are 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13... | |
| − | | |
| − | {{main|prime number theorem}}
| |
| − | It is easy to prove that there are an infinite number of primes using Euclid's second theorem: Imagine there is a finite set consisting of all the primes. Multiply them all together, add 1, and call this N. N would not be divisible by any number in the set--there would always be a remainder of 1. Because all non-prime numbers can be decomposed into a product of underlying primes, N must be divisible by some prime not in the set (possibly itself), thus contradicting the assumption that the set contained all of the primes.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Another proof that there are infinitely many primes shows something stronger, namely the sum of the reciprocals of primes less than n "grows like" log(log(n)):
| |
| − | <math>\sum_{p\le x}p^{-1}\approx\log\log x</math>
| |
| | | | |
| | + | ==Sieve of Eratosthenes== |
| | | | |
| − | To construct a table of all prime numbers less than ''n'', you would use a method called the [[Sieve of Eratosthenes]]. Simply write down an ordered list of all counting numbers greater than 1. Beginning with 2*2 = 4, cross out every second number: | + | To construct a table of all prime numbers less than ''n'', you can use a method called the [[Sieve of Eratosthenes]]. Simply write down an ordered list of all counting numbers greater than 1. Beginning with 2*2 = 4, cross out every second number: |
| | | | |
| | :2 3 <s>4</s> 5 <s>6</s> 7 <s>8</s> 9 <s>10</s> 11 ... | | :2 3 <s>4</s> 5 <s>6</s> 7 <s>8</s> 9 <s>10</s> 11 ... |
| Line 24: |
Line 19: |
| | | | |
| | Beginning with 5*5 = 25, cross out every fifth number, then repeat for the primes 7, 11, 13, etc. until <math>\sqrt{n}</math>. | | Beginning with 5*5 = 25, cross out every fifth number, then repeat for the primes 7, 11, 13, etc. until <math>\sqrt{n}</math>. |
| | + | |
| | + | The number of primes smaller than a given number <math>N</math> is roughly <math>\frac{N}{\ln(N)}</math>, where <math>\ln(N)</math> is the [[natural logarithm]] (base ''[[e]]'') of <math>N</math>.<ref>http://home.att.net/~numericana/answer/primes.htm</ref> This is a formulation of a more general statement known as the [[prime number theorem]]. |
| | + | |
| | + | ==The Prime Numbers== |
| | + | {{main|prime number theorem}} |
| | + | It is easy to prove that there are an infinite number of primes using Euclid's second theorem: Imagine there is a finite set consisting of all the primes. Multiply them all together, add 1, and call this N. N would not be divisible by any number in the set--there would always be a remainder of 1. Because all non-prime numbers can be decomposed into a product of underlying primes, N must be divisible by some prime not in the set (possibly itself), thus contradicting the assumption that the set contained all of the primes. |
| | + | |
| | + | Another proof that there are infinitely many primes shows something stronger, namely the sum of the reciprocals of primes less than n "grows like" log(log(n)): |
| | + | <math>\sum_{p\le x}p^{-1}\approx\log\log x</math> |
| | + | |
| | | | |
| | ==Alternative Definition== | | ==Alternative Definition== |