Difference between revisions of "User talk:Musictheory2math"
Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
: [[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] ([[User talk:Boris Tsirelson|talk]]) 20:57, 18 March 2017 (CET) | : [[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] ([[User talk:Boris Tsirelson|talk]]) 20:57, 18 March 2017 (CET) | ||
− | ''''''I have special thanks to Professor [[User:Boris_Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] for this beauty proof.Sincerely yours, Alireza Badali Sarebangholi'''''' | + | ''''''I have special thanks to Professor [[User:Boris_Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] for this beauty proof. Sincerely yours, Alireza Badali Sarebangholi'''''' |
Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
− | And I want to say philosophy of "A way for finding formula of prime numbers " : However we loose the well-ordering axiom and as a DIRECT result we loose the induction axiom for finite sets but I thought that if change SPACE from natural numbers with cardinal countable to a bounded set with cardinal uncountable in the real numbers then we can use other TOOLS like axioms and | + | And I want to say philosophy of "A way for finding formula of prime numbers " : However we loose the well-ordering axiom and as a DIRECT result we loose the induction axiom for finite sets but I thought that if change SPACE from natural numbers with cardinal countable to a bounded set with cardinal uncountable in the real numbers then we can use other TOOLS like axioms and important theorems in the real numbers for working on prime numbers and I think this is better and easier.[[User:Musictheory2math|Musictheory2math]] ([[User talk:Musictheory2math|talk]]) 16:29, 25 March 2017 (CET) |
:I see. Well, we are free to use the whole strength of mathematics (including analysis) in the number theory; and in fact, analysis is widely used, as you may see in the article "Distribution of prime numbers". | :I see. Well, we are free to use the whole strength of mathematics (including analysis) in the number theory; and in fact, analysis is widely used, as you may see in the article "Distribution of prime numbers". | ||
Line 55: | Line 55: | ||
− | Theorem: C= | + | Theorem: C=S×S is dense in the (0.1 , 1)×(0.1 , 1) . |
− | similar theorems is right for C= | + | similar theorems is right for C=S×T and C=T×S and C=T×T. |
− | Theorem: for each point in the (0.1 , 1) | + | Theorem: for each point in the (0.1 , 1)×(0.1 , 1) like t=(x,y), if t(n)=(x(n) , y(n)) be a sequence such that limit of t(n) be t and x(n) and y(n) are sequences in the S or T then limit of x(n) is x and limit of y(n) is y. |
− | now I divide the (0.1 , 1) | + | now I divide the (0.1 , 1)×(0.1 , 1) to three areas one the line y=(10x)^(-1) two under the line namely V and three top of the line namely W. |
Obviously each point in V like t=(x , y) has a dual point like u=((10x)^(-1) , (10y)^(-1)) in W , PARTICULARLY if x be in T. | Obviously each point in V like t=(x , y) has a dual point like u=((10x)^(-1) , (10y)^(-1)) in W , PARTICULARLY if x be in T. | ||
Line 79: | Line 79: | ||
:"Theorem: T=H(P) that P is the set of prime numbers is dense in the (0.1 , 1)." — I guess you mean H(S), not H(P). Well, this is just a special case of a simple topological fact (no number theory needed): A is dense if and only if H(A) is dense (just because H is a [[homeomorphism]]). | :"Theorem: T=H(P) that P is the set of prime numbers is dense in the (0.1 , 1)." — I guess you mean H(S), not H(P). Well, this is just a special case of a simple topological fact (no number theory needed): A is dense if and only if H(A) is dense (just because H is a [[homeomorphism]]). | ||
− | :"Theorem: C= | + | :"Theorem: C=S×S is dense in the (0.1 , 1)×(0.1 , 1) similar theorems is right for C=S×T and C=T×S and C=T×T." — This is also a special case of a simple topological fact: $A\times B$ is dense if and only if $A$ and $B$ are dense. [[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] ([[User talk:Boris Tsirelson|talk]]) 18:53, 25 March 2017 (CET) |
Dear Professor Boris Tsirelson, your help is very valuable to me and I think we can make a good paper together of course if you like.[[User:Musictheory2math|Musictheory2math]] ([[User talk:Musictheory2math|talk]]) 16:47, 27 March 2017 (CEST) | Dear Professor Boris Tsirelson, your help is very valuable to me and I think we can make a good paper together of course if you like.[[User:Musictheory2math|Musictheory2math]] ([[User talk:Musictheory2math|talk]]) 16:47, 27 March 2017 (CEST) |
Revision as of 12:49, 30 March 2017
A way for finding formula of prime numbers
Main theorem: If P be the set of all prime numbers and S be a set has been made as below: Put a point on the beginning of each member of P like 0.2 or 0.19 then S={ 0.2 , 0.3 , 0.5 , 0.7 , ...} is dense in the interval (0.1 , 1) of real numbers. This theorem is a introduction for finding formula of prime numbers.Musictheory2math (talk) 16:29, 25 March 2017 (CET)
- True, S is dense in the interval (0.1 , 1); this fact follows easily from well-known results on Distribution of prime numbers. But I doubt that this is "a way for finding formula of prime numbers". Boris Tsirelson (talk) 22:10, 16 March 2017 (CET)
Dear Professor Boris Tsirelson , in fact finding formula of prime numbers is very lengthy. and I am not sure be able for that but please give me a few time about two month for expression my theories.Musictheory2math (talk) 16:29, 25 March 2017 (CET)
- You mean, how to prove that $S$ is dense in $(0.1,1)$, right? Well, on the page "Distribution of prime numbers", in Section 6 "The difference between prime numbers", we have $ d_n \ll p_n^\delta $, where $p_n$ is the $n$-th prime number, and $ d_n = p_{n+1}-p_n $ is the difference between adjacent prime numbers; this relation holds for all $ \delta > \frac{7}{12} $; in particular, taking $ \delta = 1 $ we get $ d_n \ll p_n $, that is, $ \frac{d_n}{p_n} \to 0 $ (as $ n \to \infty $), or equivalently, $ \frac{p_{n+1}}{p_n} \to 1 $. Now, your set $S$ consists of numbers $ s_n = 10^{-k} p_n $ for all $k$ and $n$ such that $ 10^{k-1} < p_n < 10^k $. Assume that $S$ is not dense in $(0.1,1).$ Take $a$ and $b$ such that $ 0.1 < a < b < 1 $ and $ s_n \notin (a,b) $ for all $n$; that is, no $p_n$ belongs to the set
\[ X = (10a,10b) \cup (100a,100b) \cup (1000a,1000b) \cup \dots \, ; \]
- all $ p_n $ belong to its complement
\[ Y = (0,\infty) \setminus X = (0,10a] \cup [10b,100a] \cup [100b,1000a] \cup \dots \]
- Using the relation $ \frac{p_{n+1}}{p_n} \to 1 $ we take $N$ such that $ \frac{p_{n+1}}{p_n} < \frac b a $ for all $n>N$. Now, all numbers $p_n$ for $n>N$ must belong to a single interval $ [10^{k-1} b, 10^k a] $, since it cannot happen that $ p_n \le 10^k a $ and $ p_{n+1} \ge 10^k b $ (and $n>N$). We get a contradiction: $ p_n \to \infty $ but $ p_n \le 10^k a $.
- And again, please sign your messages (on talk pages) with four tildas: ~~~~.
- Boris Tsirelson (talk) 20:57, 18 March 2017 (CET)
'I have special thanks to Professor Boris Tsirelson for this beauty proof. Sincerely yours, Alireza Badali Sarebangholi'
Now I want say one of results of the main theorem:
For each natural number like a=a(1)a(2)a(3)...a(k) that a(j) is j_th digit in the decimal system there is a natural number like b=b(1)b(2)b(3)...b(r) such that the number c=a(1)a(2)a(3)...a(k)b(1)b(2)b(3)...b(r) be a prime number.Musictheory2math (talk) 16:29, 25 March 2017 (CET)
- Ah, yes, I see, this follows easily from the fact that $S$ is dense. Sounds good. Though, decimal digits are of little interest in the number theory. (I think so; but I am not an expert in the number theory.) Boris Tsirelson (talk) 11:16, 19 March 2017 (CET)
And I want to say philosophy of "A way for finding formula of prime numbers " : However we loose the well-ordering axiom and as a DIRECT result we loose the induction axiom for finite sets but I thought that if change SPACE from natural numbers with cardinal countable to a bounded set with cardinal uncountable in the real numbers then we can use other TOOLS like axioms and important theorems in the real numbers for working on prime numbers and I think this is better and easier.Musictheory2math (talk) 16:29, 25 March 2017 (CET)
- I see. Well, we are free to use the whole strength of mathematics (including analysis) in the number theory; and in fact, analysis is widely used, as you may see in the article "Distribution of prime numbers".
- But you still do not put four tildas at the end of each your message; please do. Boris Tsirelson (talk) 11:16, 19 March 2017 (CET)
Season 1:
How many there are prime numbers with n digits for each natural number like n. For define a good and continuous mapping between (0.1 , 1) or subsets of, is better to know somethings about above question. this season provide a mapping from S to the set of natural numbers.
Season 2: I believe rectangle is the best for a figure (and even concept like multiplication at natural numbers) Now I want go to the (0.1 , 1)x(0.1 , 1) in the Euclidean page.( euclidean is the best every where) Now we have more tools to do.(my mind is sequences in the Euclidean page)
now I define a mapping H from (0.1 , 1) to (0.1 , 1) by H(x)=(10x)^(-1) thus H is continuous and descending.
Theorem: T=H(S) is dense in the (0.1 , 1).
T={ 2^(-1) , 3^(-1) , 5^(-1) , ... }={ (10^(n-1))xp^(-1) : p is in P and n is number of digits of p}
T is a interested set for its members because of, a member of S like 0.a(1)a(2)a(3)...a(n) that a(j) is j-th its digit in the decimal system for j=1,2,3, ... ,n is basically different with inverse of a(1).a(2)a(3)a(4)...a(n) in T.
Theorem: C=S×S is dense in the (0.1 , 1)×(0.1 , 1) .
similar theorems is right for C=S×T and C=T×S and C=T×T.
Theorem: for each point in the (0.1 , 1)×(0.1 , 1) like t=(x,y), if t(n)=(x(n) , y(n)) be a sequence such that limit of t(n) be t and x(n) and y(n) are sequences in the S or T then limit of x(n) is x and limit of y(n) is y.
now I divide the (0.1 , 1)×(0.1 , 1) to three areas one the line y=(10x)^(-1) two under the line namely V and three top of the line namely W.
Obviously each point in V like t=(x , y) has a dual point like u=((10x)^(-1) , (10y)^(-1)) in W , PARTICULARLY if x be in T.
Now, I define a continuous mapping from V to W like G by G(x , y)=((10x)^(-1) , (10y)^(-1)) thus G keeps the topological properties.
Therefore each topological property in V like important theorems for example middle amount theorem and main axioms can be transferred by G from T to S for the first coordinates.
In fact I want work on rational numbers and then transfer to the set of S.
And now begins topological properties:
Season 3: (hardest section)
- "Theorem: T=H(P) that P is the set of prime numbers is dense in the (0.1 , 1)." — I guess you mean H(S), not H(P). Well, this is just a special case of a simple topological fact (no number theory needed): A is dense if and only if H(A) is dense (just because H is a homeomorphism).
- "Theorem: C=S×S is dense in the (0.1 , 1)×(0.1 , 1) similar theorems is right for C=S×T and C=T×S and C=T×T." — This is also a special case of a simple topological fact: $A\times B$ is dense if and only if $A$ and $B$ are dense. Boris Tsirelson (talk) 18:53, 25 March 2017 (CET)
Dear Professor Boris Tsirelson, your help is very valuable to me and I think we can make a good paper together of course if you like.Musictheory2math (talk) 16:47, 27 March 2017 (CEST)
- Thank you for the compliment and the invitation, but no, I do not. Till now we did not write here anything really new in mathematics. Rather, simple exercises. Boris Tsirelson (talk) 18:50, 27 March 2017 (CEST)
Let D={ q : q is a rational number and q is in (0.1 , 1) } and D(1)=T U { [a(1)b(1) + a(2)b(2) + a(3)b(3) + ... + a(n)b(n)]×n^(-1) : a(i) and b(i) are in T for i=1,2,3, ... ,n and for each n in the natural numbers } , I want find a continuous mapping from D to S for transferring topological properties to S.for this, I guess D=D(1), and of course I shall be making D(2) , D(3) , ... as long as a suitable set be result ( my mind is D(1)=D(2) and D(2)=D(3) and so on and finally we obtain D=D(k) and then we work on D(k) instead D ).
Please say your comment about D=D(1).
Musictheory2math (talk) 12:34, 29 March 2017 (CEST)
- "And I have not understood ... please say more" — But I do not know what is the problem. You quote four my phrases. Which one is problematic? Boris Tsirelson (talk) 19:25, 29 March 2017 (CEST)
Dear Professor Boris Tsirelson, but I understand the "proof". Of careless, my problem was about 1<b×(a^(-1)) .
But do not you think this way about prime numbers be new and for the first time.Musictheory2math (talk) 14:23, 30 March 2017 (CEST)
Musictheory2math. Encyclopedia of Mathematics. URL: http://encyclopediaofmath.org/index.php?title=Musictheory2math&oldid=40728