Talk:Truncatable primes: Difference between revisions
→redefinition of truncatable primes
(→redefinition of truncatable primes: More of my guff :-)) |
|||
Line 63:
:Hi again Gerard, my point wasn't that truncatable primes could not be done in other bases, just that, in the lack of any base mentioned in the task description then a base of ten is meant and has been understood by all the example writers for this task (including yourself). Mentioning base 10 as I have now done might not help someone new to the concept and might distract them from what is needed to understand the task. Do you think mentioning base 10 is ''necessary''?
:Maybe because you have or are considering a solution in other bases, this is driving your request? I am questioning it as I would like to understand if I have dumbed the task down too much and truly missed a salient point or if not mentioning the base was enough and maybe more clear for the purposes of the task (not involving bases other than ten). I wish others would add their opinions too :-)<br>--[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 06:54, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
:Paddy, be careful what you wish for. The largest truncatable prime in a given base can be estimated by probabalistic methods from the Zeta Function. Computing the largest truncatable prime in several bases and comparing them with the estimated values can be used to gain insight into the Zeta Function and maybe the Reimann Hypothosis.--[[User:Nigel Galloway|Nigel Galloway]] 12:01, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
| |||