Talk:Strange unique prime triplets: Difference between revisions

From Rosetta Code
Content added Content deleted
m (→‎added a stretch goal: added some verbiage.)
(→‎added a stretch goal: Added a comment.)
Line 31: Line 31:


I tried   '''10,000,'''   but that seemed to be pushing it a bit too far   (but still doable).     -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 13:26, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
I tried   '''10,000,'''   but that seemed to be pushing it a bit too far   (but still doable).     -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 13:26, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

:Although I don't intend to post it on the main page as it's not part of the task, I coded a second Go version which uses a sieve rather than individual prime calculations and found that there were 74,588,542 unique prime triples under '''10,000''' which sum to a prime. This runs in about 4.3 seconds on my machine (core i7). --[[User:PureFox|PureFox]] ([[User talk:PureFox|talk]]) 15:21, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:21, 10 March 2021

uniqueness of the prime numbers being added

How about:     3 + 3 + 11


Nothing was mentioned about   n,  m,   and   p   being unique or not.     -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 11:05, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Added the uniqueness. I would like to rename it "strange unique prime triplets" or some such? --Paddy3118 (talk) 11:33, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
The renaming sounds good to me.     -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 13:29, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

other definitions of strange primes

Note that there are other definitions of   strange   primes.

One possibility is to rename this Rosetta Code task to:     three primes summing to a prime     or
three unique primes summing to a prime,     or somesuch.


Mathoverflow   has different definition at:

  strange and non strange prime numbers are there infinitely many of them.           -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 11:28, 10 March 2021 (UTC)


added a stretch goal

I added a stretch goal of finding all the three unique primes summing to a prime, with the primes   <   1,000.

I tried   10,000,   but that seemed to be pushing it a bit too far   (but still doable).     -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 13:26, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Although I don't intend to post it on the main page as it's not part of the task, I coded a second Go version which uses a sieve rather than individual prime calculations and found that there were 74,588,542 unique prime triples under 10,000 which sum to a prime. This runs in about 4.3 seconds on my machine (core i7). --PureFox (talk) 15:21, 10 March 2021 (UTC)