User talk:PrimeFan/Archive 1

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia.

You might find these links helpful in creating new pages or helping with the above tasks: How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style. You should read our policies at some point too.

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Angela. 18:30, 20 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome. I also appreciate the open task suggestions. Unfortunately, they are outside of my interests. But I have a friend who might know something about the second topic you suggested. User:PrimeFan

About 144, it's just a Lord of the Rings reference (which exists in the book for the sole purpose of a bad pun, so I removed it). It was the only thing I immediately thought of that seemed to fit the template I took from one of the other later numbers. I think it would be nicer if all the numbers were based on Three or Five. Kevin Saff 19:43, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Hi PrimeFan, I've posted a reply on Talk:Sphenic_number -- Ams80 00:13, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC) - Hi. I have fixed the Norwegian number pages. Wolfram 15:51, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)


 * Excellent! Thank you very much for letting me know. PrimeFan 23:59, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

PrimeFan, about Lysithea being the 12th moon of Jupiter, it's the distance from Jupiter that counts in this case. Giftlite

Hello there, I am looking for some advice and thought maybe you could help, since you seem to have contributed more to Wikipedia than me. I'm glad to bring my two cents to the WikiProject_Numbers, and since my native language is french, I think it could be helpful to translate number pages in french : the french version is currently quite poor. I wonder, though, if it would be worth starting a project on the french Wikipedia. Could you please tell me what your opinion on this topic is ? Would it be better to start a french sister-project, in order to draw interest, or is it just not worth it, and should I silently translate pages ? Should I rather add a "french translation" section to the english project ? slord 00:56, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Harshad numbers
I know you say you don't like base-dependent number properties too much, but we could use your help on Harshad numbers. I've entered a stub. Anton Mravcek 21:47, 7 May 2004 (UTC)


 * I'm glad to help. PrimeFan 19:10, 8 May 2004 (UTC)

Docuan tables
Very cute! I should have guessed. A name like "PrimeFanial tables" would have been clear. :) Thanks for the history...  +sj+ 20:30, 2004 May 16 (UTC)

Numbers in the Slovene Wikipedia
Hi, PrimeFan. Here's another PrimeFan :o) I am also glad that you've noticed how Slovene wikipedia (mainly thanks to Anton Mravcek) has started to edit articles about numbers. What does »Švutzdokuja« table in fact mean, he, he? As I wrote to Anton I have just added arithmetic functions based on Italian table. Anton started with the number 12 - but he is not able to speak Slovene language, since his family was speaking it a long time ago - and now he is trying to learn it some. So these pages reflect this situation. We came to one simple form, from which Anton (and all other of course) may proceed. We will help Anton to learn some language and on the other side we'll have stub articles. Yes, there are still no paragraphs and sentences - but occasionaly we shall fulfil them. So we may say this is somehow the finalized 'simple/spartan' format - still under stub notice. We haven't made a project to this subject. You should consider a lack of users and time, but we shall do our best. If you have other suggestions and advices for this task within Slovene wikipedia, you're very wellcome. I also think this so called »Švutzdokuja« table does not differ so much from English one - it's just simple extension.

As you wrote in your user page something about your interests with numbers I can say something similar. I am fascinated with Möbius function and related terms. (see also talk page (with Mertens conjecture)). I still have to write an article about the most notable Slovene mathematician in the field of number theory Josip Grasselli and of course many other things. Best regards. --XJamRastafire 13:21, 17 May 2004 (UTC)


 * Replied at XJamRastafire talk page. PrimeFan 15:47, 17 May 2004 (UTC)


 * »Švutzdokuja« sounds terrible in Slovene, but hey it is fine, because you've created it - so it will stay :o) I am glad you like the template. The idea to list individual divisors was of Anton Mravcek, so of course I included it. Encouraged by this talk I've made a project page (sl:Wikipedija:WikiProjekt &) which I hope will help to make these number pages look well and interesting. I'll try to make it up to date. These tables are named so, but in fact they are just somekind of data boxes like those for biology species and such, right. --XJamRastafire 16:12, 17 May 2004 (UTC)


 * Replied at XJamRastafire talk page. PrimeFan 17:00, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

any relation between Mertens record lows and centered figurate numbers? 141.217.84.72 15:36, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * I noticed that, but I thought it was just a coincidence. I'm gonna have Mathematica calculate me some more values of the Mertens function to see if I can detect any relation. PrimeFan 22:02, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Just a quick note giving kudos for listing the alphabetical property of Forty. I was just reminded of it and wanted to be sure it was listed; sure enough, it's in the 'pedia. Thanks again from a (some-time) number fan. Radagast 23:55, Jul 16, 2004 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. PrimeFan 20:23, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hi, PrimeFan. Please vote in the non-primary ArbComm elections. +sj + 05:08, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * I will read the candidate statements and vote sometime before Friday. PrimeFan 21:40, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Nontotients and noncototients
I was wondering if you might know how to say "nontotient" or "noncototient" in other languages. Even Spanish or German would be helpful. User:XJamRastafire wanted to write an article on nontotients in the Slovene Wikipedia but he wasn't able to because he doesn't know the word. In the number articles for nontotients XJam wrote "Ne obstaja noben takšen cel x, da bi veljala ena&#269;ba &#966;(x) = n." Anton Mravcek 17:46, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * I added an entry on nontotient to Wiktionary. Hopefully someone will add some translations. PrimeFan 22:08, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

47-gonal: {1, 47, 138, 274, 455, 681, 952, 1268, 1629, 2035, 2486, 2982, 3523, 4109, \ 4740, 5416, 6137, 6903, 7714, 8570, 9471, 10417, 11408, 12444, 13525, 14651, \ 15822, 17038, 18299, 19605, 20956, 22352, 23793, 25279, 26810, 28386, 30007, \ 31673, 33384, 35140, 36941, 38787, 40678, 42614, 44595, 46621, 48692, 50808, \ 52969, 55175, 57426, 59722, 62063, 64449, 66880, 69356, 71877, 74443, 77054, \ 79710, 82411, 85157, 87948, 90784, 93665, 96591, 99562, 102578, 105639, \ 108745, 111896, 115092, 118333, 121619, 124950, 128326, 131747, 135213, \ 138724, 142280, 145881, 149527, 153218, 156954, 160735, 164561, 168432, \ 172348, 176309, 180315, 184366, 188462, 192603, 196789, 201020, 205296, \ 209617, 213983, 218394, 222850}

1729-gonal: {1, 1729, 5184, 10366, 17275, 25911, 36274, 48364, 62181, 77725, 94996, \ 113994, 134719, 157171, 181350, 207256, 234889, 264249, 295336, 328150, \ 362691, 398959, 436954, 476676, 518125, 561301, 606204, 652834, 701191, \ 751275, 803086, 856624, 911889, 968881, 1027600, 1088046, 1150219, 1214119, \ 1279746, 1347100, 1416181, 1486989, 1559524, 1633786, 1709775, 1787491, \ 1866934, 1948104, 2031001, 2115625, 2201976, 2290054, 2379859, 2471391, \ 2564650, 2659636, 2756349, 2854789, 2954956, 3056850, 3160471, 3265819, \ 3372894, 3481696, 3592225, 3704481, 3818464, 3934174, 4051611, 4170775, \ 4291666, 4414284, 4538629, 4664701, 4792500, 4922026, 5053279, 5186259, \ 5320966, 5457400, 5595561, 5735449, 5877064, 6020406, 6165475, 6312271, \ 6460794, 6611044, 6763021, 6916725, 7072156, 7229314, 7388199, 7548811, \ 7711150, 7875216, 8041009, 8208529, 8377776, 8548750}

Nonagonal number
Why did you create the article at Nonagonal number instead of Enneagonal number?? 66.245.3.155 22:56, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Because I thought that was the most common name for it. I didn't even know of the term "enneagonal number" until the day I created that article. PrimeFan 22:12, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing
Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:
 * Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
 * Multi-Licensing Guide
 * Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the " " template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:


 * Option 1
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR
 * Option 2
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions to any U.S. state, county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace " " with "  ". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Six million
I'm sticking my nose in where I wasn't invited, and answering a question you left on User talk:Deror avi. The number six million absolutely and without question has historical significance to Israelis and Jews all over the world. Saying "six million" to a Jewish Israeli is practically equivalent to mentioning the holocaust. The book title that came to my mind as support for this is The Seventh Million by Tom Segev. I'm sure there's no lack of other examples. --Woggly 07:00, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * That's fine. Thanks for the references. PrimeFan 20:02, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Problem with RNTFS 7
There is a problem with your sequence RNTFS 7. Running the Mathematica command you provide yields a list of negative numbers, and even after multiplying that list by -1, that list does not match the list you give on your page. The first mismatch occurs at element 17, if I counted correctly. Del arte 20:09, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes, I suspected as much. I was having some glitches and couldn't even get Mathematica to start up, so I calculated it by hand. I will fix it today. PrimeFan 20:06, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Tribbles
Is there anything mathematically interesting about 1,771,561? ShutterBugTrekker 17:52, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Not that I know of, off the top of my head. Give me some time to check it out. PrimeFan 22:34, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * It's 116. Rich Farmbrough 22:45, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

New Mathematics Wikiportal
I noticed you've done some work on Mathematics articles. I wanted to point out to you the new Mathematics Wikiportal- more specifically, to the Mathematics Collaboration of the Week page. I'm looking for any math-related stubs or non-existant articles that you would like to see on Wikipedia. Additionally, I wondered if you'd be willing to help out on some of the Collaboration of the Week pages.

I encourage you to vote on the current Collaboration of the Week, because I'm very interested in which articles you think need to be written or added to, and because I understand that I cannot do the enormous amount of work required on some of the Math stubs alone. I'm asking for your help, and also your critiques on the way the portal is set up.

Please direct all comments to my user-talk page, the Math Wikiportal talk page, or the Math Collaboration of the Week talk page. Thanks a lot for your support! ral315 02:54, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)

Three halves
Hi PrimeFan, I'd appreciate if you would lend your insight to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Numbers. Thanks, dbenbenn | talk 00:15, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Strictly non-palindromic numbers
In 700 (number) you've labelled 739 as a strictly non-palindromic number. What is this?

Is it a number that is not palindromic in any base in which it has at least three digits? It is palindromic in base 738.

Karl Palmen 3 May 2005 (UTC)


 * That's right, it is palindromic in base 738. But it's not palindromic in binary, hexadecimal, or any base up to base 737. No integer is completely non-palindromic (n is palindromic in base n - 1 if nothing else), and the name "strictly non-palindromic" might not be the clearest, but "n is not palindromic in any base b with 2 <= b <= n-2" is a little cumbersome. (Both of these terms are taken from . PrimeFan 17:53, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

Years and numerals
Hoi PrimeFan,

Please read and comment on my years and dates proposal, affecting years that are also numerals. It would be nice to get feedback from the whole Numbers WikiProject crew... just going on inbound links alone, a change would be welcome. +sj +  20:45, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

green flag
its not quite as complete as I had hoped to get it, but it will do: A046970 in the oeis. I suggest you take htis as a green flag and proceed with the expansion to the article we talked about. Numerao 17:28, 11 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Excellent, thanks very much for the heads up. PrimeFan 21:01, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Friedman numbers
PrimeFan, could you correct the spelling of my name in the article Friedman number? Or perhaps even remove mentions of me (I don't currently consider myself encyclopedic). I could do it, but I would rather avoid any appearance of vanity. Robert Happelberg 23:16, 21 July 2005 (UTC)


 * No problem, I've corrected the spelling.


 * But I see no reason to remove mentions of you from the article. You might not merit your own article at this time, but you're just as encyclopedic as Reid, Fondanaiche, anyone who has assisted Friedman, perhaps even more so: Friedman credits you with inventing Roman numeral Friedman numbers. PrimeFan 18:04, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

hi friend
I noticed that you'r into numbers, esp. primes, a? I just created a new article about a number that has a rather esoteric pop culture significance. I think it deserves all the careful treatment that number articles get. who could help me out here? I'll take some tips, or if someone wants to jump in & help directly- awesome also. maybe you could pass this message on to anyone who might be able to help.

thanks, Dzzl 17:37, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Citing OEIS
FYI: I replied to your comment at Talk:On-Line Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences. Hv 01:08, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Wondrous numbers
Collatz conjecture :-) Rich Farmbrough 23:54, 25 August 2005 (UTC) (Spelling fixed) Rich Farmbrough 12:54, 29 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I will study it. PrimeFan 20:25, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Formatting
Hi PrimeFan. Are fan of powers too? :) Just a remark, it is good to use HTML markup for powers, as, at least in my view, 2100 looks much better than 2^100, even if requires a bit of work. What do you think? You can reply in here. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 07:23, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Primefree sequences in the OEIS
Regarding WEBDEOEIS4, did you mean "A_n as visible in the current OEIS contains no primes" or "A_n when considered in full - meaning usually all infinitely many terms - contains no prime"? Del arte 17:30, 21 October 2005 (UTC)


 * I meant the latter. For example, A000004 is the zero sequence. a(0) = 0. a(100) = 0. a(2^65536 + 1) = 0, etc. It doesn't take a college education to realize that every term of that sequence is a zero. On the other hand, with a sequence like A105966 I just can't be sure. I don't know what floretions are and I'm way too old to learn floretion algebra. PrimeFan 20:51, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Picture for Markov numbers
I tried to make a picture for Markov number. Please let me know if you want to have it changed in any way.

I see on your user page (and I could have guessed from your account name) that you're quite into numbers. I might actually have voted to delete one of the number articles that you are fond of. So you could see this as an effort to make up for it (though I realized this only after I made the picture). Cheers, Jitse Niesen (talk) 19:47, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

33
You wrote that '33 is the smallest positive integer that can not be expressed as a sum of different triangular numbers.'.

This statement is wrong. '33 is the LARGEST positive integer that can not be expressed as a sum of different triangular numbers.'


 * Thank you for pointing out my mistake and correcting it. PrimeFan 22:42, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Sources for Exponential factorial
Hello, good work on Exponential factorial, and thanks for the contribution. However, you forgot to add any references to the article. Keeping Wikipedia accurate and verifiable is very important, and there is currently a push to encourage editors to cite the sources they used when adding content. What websites, books, or other places did you learn the information that you added to Exponential factorial? Would it be possible for you to mention them in the article? Thank you very much. - SimonP 05:54, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

10^n+1 primes, lucky numbers of Euler
Comments to "Some Kinds Of Primes I've Been Thinking About" on your user page.

10^n+1 can only be prime if n is a power of 2 (or n=0). More generally: If m is odd then a+1 divides a^m+1, as seen by computation modulo a+1: a^m+1 == (-1)^m+1 == -1+1 == 0.

If n = b*m for odd m and any b then a^n+1 = a^(b*m)+1 = (a^b)^m+1 is divisible by a^b+1. So, if n>0 is not a power of 2, then a^n+1 is composite for a>1. The only known primes for a=10 are n = 0, 1, 2. n has been tested to high powers of 2. More primes seem very unlikely.

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/LuckyNumberofEuler.html says the only p such that n^2-n+p is prime for n = 0 to p-2 are: p = 2, 3, 5, 11, 17, 41 (7 is not such a p). I think it should say n = 0 to p-1 like http://www.research.att.com/~njas/sequences/A014556 but it turns out to not change the p's. The polynomial is sometimes written n^2+n+p, other times n^2-n+p. (n-1)^2+(n-1) = n^2-n, so n^2+n+p for n = 0 to p-2 is equal to n^2-n+p for n = 1 to p-1. p divides n^2+n+p for n = p-1. PrimeHunter 16:05, 14 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for your insights. PrimeFan 20:34, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

OEIS references in your GeoCities page
Your GeoCities pages have many links to the OEIS but you have not updated them to reflect the new URL format. As a result, your links give 404s. Anton Mravcek 22:52, 9 February 2006 (UTC)


 * You're right, I need to change that. The mechanism for that is not as seamless as Wikipedia's, so give me some time. I hope to have it all changed by next weekend. Thanks for letting me know. PrimeFan 21:38, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Proof
Proof came out on DVD today. Have you seen it? Could you expand the article about it? Robert Happelberg 23:46, 14 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm no movie buff. I think I'll rent it, I might e-mail you my thoughts on it, but I'd rather leave the editing of the article about it to people who know more about the cinema than I do. PrimeFan 19:07, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

numbers
I think I'll pass on any NASCAR debate in number articles, thanks. I know nothing of the topic, and just had a vicious run-in with some baseball fans over a wildly unimportant article that I tidied up; they were so mad they vandalized the article about my employer! No more fights with sports fans for now ... - DavidWBrooks 13:36, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

10^n+1
Numbers of this form are always divisible by 11 when n is odd because of a famous (at least to me) test for divisibility by eleven. Add the first digit, subtract the second, add the third ...... If this is divisible by eleven so is the original number. This can be shown in the same manner as the divisibility by 3 rule. So as you look at 11, 1001, 100001..... The test shows that they are all divisibl by eleven.


 * That's absolutely right. I have a knack for overlooking the obvious! PrimeFan 19:09, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

(disambiguation) pages
E.G. 804 (disambiguation) I think thsese should be moved to the (number) page (combined with our seed info from the range page). What do you think? Rich Farmbrough 00:03 9  May 2006 (UTC). P.S. &#x0F2B; Rich Farmbrough 00:03 9  May 2006 (UTC).


 * I don't know... 800 (number) has just that 804 is a nontotient and a Harshad number (implied base 10, property also holds in bases 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 12, etc, and factorial base, but even so it's not terribly special). Friedman's "What's Special About This Number?" page has nothing on 804.


 * A search for "804 keyword:core" in Sloane's OEIS turns up nothing. On the other hand, a search for "804 keyword:nice" turns up, Increasing gaps between primes. The most interesting result, in my opinion, is , Numbers n such that n^4 = x^3 + y^2 has a solution in integers.


 * At this point I'm not sure that this together with the Richmond tidbit is enough to create a page that might likely get nominated for deletion. PrimeFan 20:55, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

heteromecic numbers
I left a note about consistency in what links to heteromecic number. I think you did all the original links, so I'd appreciate it if you'd look, and see if I corrected you, or missed your intent. --Walt 12:26, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

oeis
could you update OEIS section id number and section keyword (i.e., what's taht new keyword "less"? Numerao 22:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Sure, no problem. Thanks for the reminder. PrimeFan 21:23, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Multiples of 11 and 9
Ah, I hadn't tried that one. I just did the first few (11, 22, 33). So there is another rule that needs to be clarified. Although now that I think about it, I get what you mean, I hadn't taken it another step. If you haven't removed my edition yet, I'll go ahead and remove it. JJ4sad6 22:59, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Divisibility by 13
I see in Talk:Sylvester's sequence that you claim that it's obvious that 13 divides 1807. It is easy if one knows the trick (are you using 1001? there are other tricks); it is obvious only in the sense of Laplace.

Why am I harping on this? Please remember that we are writing almost always for readers who don't know our tricks; that's why they're reading Wikipedia. Septentrionalis 18:10, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Smarandache-Wellin number
I have added a "" template to the article Smarandache-Wellin number, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at its talk page. Removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, but the article may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. —David Eppstein 19:35, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

PlanetMath
''I don't think the PlanetMath forums are broken, at least not in any technical sense. I think if the other members exhibited more of the spirit of cooperation that you have abundantly shown (and which I hope hasn't been too much of a sidetrack from your research) the forums would contain more math sprinkled with a few interesting (but civilly stated) sidetracks. I again thank you for your help over there and the understanding way in which you offer it. PrimeFan 23:12, 25 February 2007 (UTC)''


 * Right, there's no technical problem. I find I'm starting to lose my cool and jump into threads I shouldn't, so I'm going to step back from the fora for a bit.  As for my research, last night I managed to find a new (not to say better) proof for one of the basic theorems in my research area.  It remains to be seen whether the proof technique is more widely applicable.  Michael Slone (talk) 13:51, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Replied at Michael Slone's talk page. PrimeFan 22:18, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Notability for numbers
What's the reason why only the powers of primes should be considered notable for selection? Is a power of 5 or a power of 7 any more notable than a power of 4, a power of 6 or a power of 8? Is a power of 11 or a power of 13 more notable than a power of an eminently practical number like the dozen (a number of highly unusual properties)? Or a power of 17 or a power of 19 more notable than a power of the score, that is, than a vigesimal power (very prominent for vigesimal-based cultures/languages like those from Mesoamerica)? Sorry to say this, considering you are a fan of primes, but prime numbers (a.k.a. "rigid numbers") are interesting mostly in theory (because of their being "building blocks" for other numbers) and their importance has been rather overrated, because except for the first few of them (2, 3, 5, 7), they are of very limited value in real life since their minimal divisibility makes them particularly inconvenient for many practical purposes. My criterion for notability is that the selected numbers are powers of small numbers (prime or not), i.e. powers of "everyday" numbers (say, in the range 1-100, or else in the range 1-60 for a non-decimal-biased limit), or powers of particularly special higher numbers such as the powers of highly composite numbers like 360 (highly composites, a.k.a. "versatile numbers", are very rare, unlike primes, and their exceptional, relatively-maximal divisibility places them at a diametrically opposed side from the minimal divisibility of primes). Except for squares and cubes, which are relatively abundant and thus not particularly notable when their square or cube root is a large non-notable number, there aren't at all so many other powers (fifth or sixth or seventh powers) in the long range from 10000001 to 99999999; so such powers are notable if only for their extreme relative rarity (we are talking about only some thirty numbers out of almost ninety million; that's 0.00003% of them), and especially when (as in the case of sixth powers) they are simultaneously the powers of several different numbers (a not very usual property which makes this kind of powers particularly notable). BTW, I already have an account (User:Uaxuctum), but most of the time I cannot be bothered to log in (especially for supposedly uncontroversial edits such as adding to a list of mathematical facts), and I don't find it appropriate to discuss one of my edits under a different identifier than the one with which I initially happened to make it, because I think it would only confuse casual readers. 213.37.6.106 00:41, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Normally I would agree that that's uncontroversial. But if you find yourself reverting, it's better to log in, because in a revert war it makes it that easier to side with the logged in user and dismiss the non-logged in user as a vandal.


 * For this particular issue, please take it up, logged in, at the relevant article talk page and/or at the WP:NUM talk page. PrimeFan 23:13, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Proof (2005 film)
Jackpot! Thanks! Chubbles 00:25, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Higgs prime
Hi, PrimeFan. Who in fact gave a name to Higgs primes? --xJaM 17:22, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure. The cited Burris & Lee article states:


 * Corollary 3.2. [D. Higgs]. N1, k is a quotient of N iff $$k \in {1, 2, 6, 42, 1806}$$.


 * and later on cites 2, 3, 7, 43 as "Higgs' result." A search for Higgs primes in the OEIS gives 6 results, sequences contributed by Neil Sloane, Robert G. Wilson, Alonso Delarte and David Wilson. I will take another look at the Guy reference. If it says "Higgs prime," that canonizes the name as far as I'm concerned. PrimeFan 22:59, 19 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your answer. The question arised at talk page of Slovene article for Higgs primes - and since it was adapted from English article it also does not state from where the name actually came. The physicist Peter Higgs was mentioned, but I doubted that he was dealing with these kind of primes, althought there is a possibility that he researched them. --xJaM 11:16, 20 July 2007 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. I haven't looked at the Guy book yet, but I have a feeling it just says "D. Higgs" like the Burris & Lee article (this is one thing that annoys me about math biblios). I'll let you know what I find. PrimeFan 23:41, 20 July 2007 (UTC) P.S. I'll read up on Peter Higgs, too.

Note to self
$$\pi = \frac{5\sqrt{2 + \phi}}{2\phi} \sum_{n = 0}^\infty \left(\frac{1}{2\phi}\right)^{5n} \left(\frac{1}{5n + 1} + \frac{1}{2\phi^2(5n + 2)} - \frac{1}{4\phi^3(5n + 3)} - \frac{1}{8\phi^3(5n + 4)}\right)$$

Hei-Chi Chan "&pi; In Terms Of &phi;" ''Fib. Quart'' 44 2 (2006): 141 PrimeFan 20:27, 29 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Also

$$\frac{\pi}{5\sqrt{2 + \phi}} = \sum_{n = 0}^\infty \left(\frac{1}{2\phi}\right)^{5n}\left(\frac{1}{2\phi(5n + 1)} + \frac{1}{2^2\phi^3(5n + 2)} - \frac{1}{2^3\phi^4(5n + 3)} - \frac{1}{2^4\phi^4(5n + 4)}\right)$$

and

$$\pi = \frac{5\sqrt{2 + \phi}}{2\phi} \sum_{n = 0}^\infty \left(\frac{1}{\phi}\right)^{5n}\left(\frac{1}{5n + 1} + \frac{1}{\phi^2(5n + 2)} - \frac{1}{\phi^3(5n + 3)} - \frac{1}{\phi^3(5n + 4)}\right)$$

from the same source. PrimeFan 22:03, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Diffs
A "diff" is just a URL that provides a comparison between two versions of a Wikipedia page. They are usually generated by using the "Compare versions" button on the Edit History. Here's an example.

--Richard 23:04, 2 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh that. Thanks for explaining it, and for the example. PrimeFan 23:40, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Number trivia
What's with all the unsourced number trivia that you're adding and defending at a furious pace? The biggest need of the number articles is to get them sourced, not to accumulate more unsourced junk. Can you help? Dicklyon 23:50, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
 * some of the items are certainly worth being in those articles, though perhaps not every one--if you need help defending them, just let me know. DGG (talk) 00:19, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll be happy to help defend anything with a reliable source. Dicklyon 01:27, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, Dicklyon, I don't know what you're talking about. Could you give me one specific example? PrimeFan 20:55, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
 * In reviewing your contribs, I must have been referring to your reverts of Eyrian's removals of large numbers of trivia items. So I was probably wrong on the "adding", but I don't see why you're "defending" these triva items, as opposed to adding back just the ones that are significant and have sources. Dicklyon 06:43, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, that. On the one hand, Eyrian deletes stuff 90% of us agree should not be in there. On the other hand, he deleted stuff 99% of us agree should be in there. I don't like the Saros stuff, but I'm in a very small club, the entire astronomy Wikiproject disagrees with me on that. What would happen if I tried to impose my will by randomly selecting three or four of the number articles between 1 and 99 and removing the Saros stuff from those? I would get reverted once, then I'd revert, someone else would revert me, I'd revert again, eventually I'd get the 3RR warning. What if I prevail? Three articles are left dis-uniform with the other 97. Could I expect a coalition of the same people I alienated by trying to impose my will rise to enforce my will in the other 97 articles? I don't think so. Changes to a whole bunch of articles at once need to have the cooperation of a group of people, not one individual convinced he's right and everyone else is wrong. Eventually someone would notice that say, 43 doesn't say anything about Saros but 44, 45, 46 and 47 do. So he adds it back in. But by this process a whole bunch of dis-uniformities creep in and become a task much more daunting in appearance than it actually is. Sometimes I think this is a young man's game and I should quit.
 * The imposition of will is not in the best interest of the cause of math popularization. That cause is shared by the members of WP:NUM, who conference with members of other projects to form concensus on various intersections of their interests. PrimeFan 21:23, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

pm vindictive ratings log
NUMB3RS OpenPFGW opus number   table of primes between the first 100 squares  (from Encyclopedia) 292.  table of pseudoprimes below 2000 in bases 2 to 16  (from Encyclopedia) 293.  table of small Kn\"odel numbers $K_n$ for $0 < n < 26$  Texas Instruments Numerao 19:55, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh, OK, thanks, I suppose. PrimeFan 21:42, 26 August 2007 (UTC)