Anonymous user
Talk:Truncatable primes: Difference between revisions
m
→redefinition of truncatable primes: sign
(→redefinition of truncatable primes: External conversations should make allowances for the base of any work they refer to.) |
m (→redefinition of truncatable primes: sign) |
||
Line 66:
::While claryfing this task you may wish to be clear if you consider 1 to be a prime number, you should not. From which it follows that 13 is a left reducable prime, but not a right reducable prime.--[[User:Nigel Galloway|Nigel Galloway]] 12:10, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
:::Surely treating one as prime is not the ''[http://oeis.org/A000040 normal]'' thing to do. Both Sloane and Mathworld don't consider it so. If someone ios mentioning Truncatable primes in bases other than ten then what base you are considering is important. You may well be having conversations off-site that are clarified if the bases involved are stated, but the task description is right in itself. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 17:36, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
| |||