[ad_1]
The Greek mathematician Euclid probably proved, around 300 BCE, that there are enormous numbers. But it was British mathematician Christian Lawson-Perfect who, most recently, developed a computer game “Is this the first one?”
Launched five years ago, the game surpassed three million trials on July 16 – or, until then, reached 2,999,999 – after Hacker News led to nearly 100,000 experiments.
The goal of the game is to rank multiple numbers “prime” or “not prime” in 60 seconds (as in Lawson-Perfect originally he explained go ahead The period of Aperiodical, a mathematical blog started by an editor).
The first number is the total number consisting of only two disches, 1 separately.
“It’s simple, but very difficult,” said Lawson-Perfect, who works in an e-learning unit at Newcastle University’s School of Mathematics and Statistics. He created the game in his spare time, but it has always been important for the project: Lawson-Perfect writes e-learning software (machines that try to learn). “The machines I make are designed to be able to create a random maths question, and take an answer from a student, who just writes and gives them the answers,” he says. “You can see the game of primes as a kind of reflection” – they are used to teach people in school.
Made the game a little easier with the keyboard shortcuts — y and keys click the same buttons — yes on the screen — to save time for mouse navigation.
Strong:
Pre-view algorithms
Larger numbers are used in computers, such as error code and encryption. But even though the first thing is difficult (hence its importance to hide), the first look is easy, if at all difficult. Mathematician for The Fields Medal Alexander Grothendieck wrong wrong wrong 57 for prime (“Grothendieck prime”). When Lawson-Perfect analyzed a lot on the game, found that various numbers had a certain “Grothendieckyness”. The number that was most often wrong was 51, followed by 57, 87, 91, 119, and 133 – of Lawson-Perfect’s nemesis (reorganized the work of initial screening: https://isthisprime.com/2).
The simplest way to reduce the quantity is to divide the test – divide the numbers by each number until its root is round (which two numbers larger than the main lines may be larger than the number in question).
However, the naïve method does not work very well, and other methods have not been developed for centuries – as German mathematician Carl Friedrich Gauss put it in 1801, “demanding the hard work of even the most sophisticated calculator.”
The Lawson-Perfect concept that was written on the game is called the Miller-Rabin test (which builds on the most effective but not the 17th-century metal method, “”A little Fermat idea”). The Miller-Rabin test works amazingly well. According to Lawson-Perfect, it’s “magic” – “I don’t understand how it works, but I’m confident I would have time to take a closer look,” he says.
Since these experiments are used consistently, it produces very clear results. Which means that sometimes the test is tested. Carl Pomerance, a mathematician at Dartmouth College and co-author of the book, said: “There is an opportunity to identify the kidnapper, who is trying to be the greatest.” Key Statistics: Inclusive Thoughts. The probability that a child molester will be able to use surveillance methods is probably one trillion, yet the test is “very safe.”
As for expert experimental testing methods, the Miller-Rabin test is the “fifth point,” says Pomerance. In fact, 19 years ago, three computer scientists – Manindra Agrawal, Neeraj Kayal, and Nitin Saxena, all from the Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur – announced Preliminary testing of AKS (by rebuilding the Fermat method), which eventually provided a test to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the number is very important, unlimited and (mentally, at least) incredibly fast. Unfortunately, the concept of urgency does not always translate into real life, which is why the AKS test is not a viable option.
An unknown history around the world
But practice is not always important. Lawson-Perfect sometimes receives emails from people who want to share more about the game. The player recently recorded 60 primes in 60 seconds, but the record is likely to be 127. (Lawson-Perfect doesn’t follow much; he knows there are other scammers, tested by computers that extract spikes in the data.)
127 studies were completed by Ravi Fernando, a mathematician at the University of California, Berkeley, who wrote the following in July 2020. He is still very good, and he sees, “an unknown world history.”
Since last summer, Fernando has not played the game consistently, but has experimented with favors, choosing larger numbers and allowing long-range limits – scoring 240 and five-minute limits. “That took a lot, because the numbers came to four degrees and I just memorized the primes up to 3,000 low,” he says. “I think some would argue even though this is a bit more.”
Fernando’s research is in algebraic geometry, which affects primes to some degree. But, he says, “My research has more to do with why I stopped playing the game than with why I started” (he started his PhD in 2014). In addition, 127 numbers can be hard to beat. And he says, “It just makes sense to stop the big news.”
[ad_2]
Source link
