Live data from Hacker News

An Interesting Pattern in the Prime Numbers: Parallax Compression

novaspivack.com

191–195 of 195 posts

Re: An Interesting Pattern in the Prime Numbers: Parallax Compression

#191
post #98

I wonder why the authors took the time to generate an image of their pattern but refrained from giving the actual DEFINITION. This does not foster constructive discussion of any possible ideas present. As can be seen in dozens of well-meaning comments here, people waste time reversing and guestimating parameters etc. Looking at the layman letters that my institute gets on a regular basis, I can say, that this is unfo…

I fail to see how this reply is helpful to anyone other than your ego. Perhaps you could state your view in a way that constructively improves their observations.

Re: An Interesting Pattern in the Prime Numbers: Parallax Compression

#192

The drawing is incorrect. More specifically, it’s a drawing of OEIS A054521 (black if gcd(row, col) == 1, red otherwise), not of the parallax compressed primes. The two drawings do not match as claimed. The first place where they differ is row 9, column 1, which is drawn as black even though none of 217, 226, 235, 244, 253, 262 are prime. It’s clear that gcd(row, col) == 1 is a necessary condition for there to be any…

UPDATE - Saturday May 19

The drawing has been updated on the blog post cited above; there was an error in the description of it, this has been clarified and the code has been updated as well

Join the Telegram group to discuss: https://t.me/joinchat/G8AnchIna2q8yn1lGHirkA

Note that Even and Odd Values of N have a very different pattern.

For example try using the values 99 and 99, and then 100 and 100, in this HTML PREVIEW VERSION:

https://htmlpreview.github.io/?https://github.com/acmegeek/p...

CODE TO TRY:

Javascript https://beta.observablehq.com/@montyxcantsin/unwinding-the-u...

Mathematica https://github.com/shaunxcode/a-pattern-in-the-primes

Perl https://www.dropbox.com/s/z5tfub5geyuctex/prime-draw.pl?dl=0

EXPLANATION:

In short, actually there are some curious patterns in this, and they are not simply equivalent to OEIS A054521 (as we, and others, initially thought they were).

For even values of n, they seem to approach the OEIS A054521 sequence as n increases. But for odd values the pattern is different and OEIS A054521 doesn't describe it at all. More discussion of this on the Telegram group...

Re: An Interesting Pattern in the Prime Numbers: Parallax Compression

#193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds to me like you should have a prewritten response for people who were interested enough to contact you, but who don't know where to start.

I am sceptical of the ability of laymen to even meaningfully understand the field that I am in enough to contribute their own ideas. The amount of literature that would have to be read and assimilated is vast, really achievable only for academics. My prewritten response would only be “Do at least an MA in this field, then we’ll talk”.

I genuinely think that's a good response.

Maybe the majority of recipients won't act, or they'll even take offense, but if somebody in there chose to contact you because they look up to your position, you could easily find in a few years that you challenged somebody to get on the right track with one of those responses. Some people are on the fence and looking for a push.

Obviously it's up to you, but I think it's worth a shot.

Re: An Interesting Pattern in the Prime Numbers: Parallax Compression

#194
post #14

My gut sense is that this has something to do with visualizing the sieve of Eratosthenes, and nothing more than that. But I'd be happy to hear otherwise.

I don't intent to be rude, but what does that even mean? Can you explain?

Mostly the "pattern holding up until n^2". I don't know exactly how the groups-of-N factors into all this. Maybe it's nothing and there's no clear relationship.

Re: An Interesting Pattern in the Prime Numbers: Parallax Compression

#195
post #165

Is this really capturing a pattern in primes, or a pattern in non-primes (which is totally not surprising).

Whats the diff?

Well, every third number is a non-prime. There's no pattern like that for primes.
Post reply on HN