I didn't think this would be worthy of the mathematics subforum, so I slammed it here. I bet someone proves something wrong in it.
This week I was reading up on the mystery of prime-numbers, mostly from this source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prime_numbers
Note the vast array of different classes of prime numbers, formed on different logics. I was mostly interested in the notion that there was no specific rule behind the distribution of prime numbers ~ even though I had already known this, it was still refreshing to get a sense of awe to think that perhaps prime numbers are in fact the epitome of randomness.
I don't like the idea it is completely random, so i wanted to search and see if there was anything I could personally find peculiar about the prime number system. I took a very rustic approach - I wanted to prove to myself that the numbers where not random at all, that perhaps, beneath the skin of it all, there was some slightly obvious pattern that might not be noticable unless one knew what they were looking for; in my search, i think i found a strange rule using a method of Eastern calculation called Vedic Sum Mathematics.
Basically, vedic mathematics is very easy, but not usually considered within the realm of mathematics, however, some number systems have shown under it's use to show some peculiar results, patterns if like, such as a technique called ''casting out nines''.
It seemed logical for some reason to try and apply it to the whole integer values of the prime number systems; so i would be taking the vedic sum value of the word. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharati_Krishna_Tirtha's_Vedic_mathematics
I analyzed the first 1000 primes. I used the vedic method to calculate their values into one string of calculations and noticed that the sum value of the numbers never came to the sum of $$3$$. This means more obviously, that the sum digits of the numbers of the first $$1000$$ primes do not have numbers which make $$3$$ or from $$12$$ which $$3$$ can be obtained from the sum; see vedic mathematics of sum calulculation of words for more, but i will give a quick example. I will take some prime numbers while we are on the subject ~ here are a few:
$$99929$$
$$99719$$
$$102059$$
$$101203$$
$$101207$$
To calculate the sum digits, you take the number, and add the digits together. If the final calculation is above the number $$10$$ which reduces simply to $$1$$, then further vedic calculation is required: let's take the first number;
$$99929$$
Adding the digits to make the sum total, we have $$9+9+9+2+9$$ which is obviously $$38$$, which then needs to be reduced further to the existence of a single digit, so $$3+8 = 11$$ and again $$1+1 = 2$$.
So the other numbers follow the same principles:
$$99719 = (9+9+7+1+9) = 35 = (3+5) = 8$$
$$102059 = (1+2+5+9) = 17 = (1+7) = 8$$
$$101203 = (1+1+2+3) = 7$$
$$101207 = (1+1+2+7) = 11 = (1+1) = 2$$
So the proposition is that in the first $$1000$$ prime numbers, vedic calculations do not contain a final value of $$3$$, so the sum digits never make the value $$12$$ to make the value of $$3$$; of course, I could have been up late last night looking at these and made a calculational error somewhere
wouldn't be the first time, but after applying the same rule to other prime numbers, i can never find one which satisfies the value of $$3$$, so I am beginning to believe it's a general rule for prime numbers even above the first $$1000$$ primes.
Since there may be a possible pattern indicated here deep within the numerology of the standing values, it would seem to indicate there is a rule which governs them from ever obtaining a certain value - so may this be an indication it has also a hidden pattern which governs how they are distributed?
Being told I have made a mistake somewhere, would be very gratifying.
This week I was reading up on the mystery of prime-numbers, mostly from this source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prime_numbers
Note the vast array of different classes of prime numbers, formed on different logics. I was mostly interested in the notion that there was no specific rule behind the distribution of prime numbers ~ even though I had already known this, it was still refreshing to get a sense of awe to think that perhaps prime numbers are in fact the epitome of randomness.
I don't like the idea it is completely random, so i wanted to search and see if there was anything I could personally find peculiar about the prime number system. I took a very rustic approach - I wanted to prove to myself that the numbers where not random at all, that perhaps, beneath the skin of it all, there was some slightly obvious pattern that might not be noticable unless one knew what they were looking for; in my search, i think i found a strange rule using a method of Eastern calculation called Vedic Sum Mathematics.
Basically, vedic mathematics is very easy, but not usually considered within the realm of mathematics, however, some number systems have shown under it's use to show some peculiar results, patterns if like, such as a technique called ''casting out nines''.
It seemed logical for some reason to try and apply it to the whole integer values of the prime number systems; so i would be taking the vedic sum value of the word. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharati_Krishna_Tirtha's_Vedic_mathematics
I analyzed the first 1000 primes. I used the vedic method to calculate their values into one string of calculations and noticed that the sum value of the numbers never came to the sum of $$3$$. This means more obviously, that the sum digits of the numbers of the first $$1000$$ primes do not have numbers which make $$3$$ or from $$12$$ which $$3$$ can be obtained from the sum; see vedic mathematics of sum calulculation of words for more, but i will give a quick example. I will take some prime numbers while we are on the subject ~ here are a few:
$$99929$$
$$99719$$
$$102059$$
$$101203$$
$$101207$$
To calculate the sum digits, you take the number, and add the digits together. If the final calculation is above the number $$10$$ which reduces simply to $$1$$, then further vedic calculation is required: let's take the first number;
$$99929$$
Adding the digits to make the sum total, we have $$9+9+9+2+9$$ which is obviously $$38$$, which then needs to be reduced further to the existence of a single digit, so $$3+8 = 11$$ and again $$1+1 = 2$$.
So the other numbers follow the same principles:
$$99719 = (9+9+7+1+9) = 35 = (3+5) = 8$$
$$102059 = (1+2+5+9) = 17 = (1+7) = 8$$
$$101203 = (1+1+2+3) = 7$$
$$101207 = (1+1+2+7) = 11 = (1+1) = 2$$
So the proposition is that in the first $$1000$$ prime numbers, vedic calculations do not contain a final value of $$3$$, so the sum digits never make the value $$12$$ to make the value of $$3$$; of course, I could have been up late last night looking at these and made a calculational error somewhere
wouldn't be the first time, but after applying the same rule to other prime numbers, i can never find one which satisfies the value of $$3$$, so I am beginning to believe it's a general rule for prime numbers even above the first $$1000$$ primes.Since there may be a possible pattern indicated here deep within the numerology of the standing values, it would seem to indicate there is a rule which governs them from ever obtaining a certain value - so may this be an indication it has also a hidden pattern which governs how they are distributed?
Being told I have made a mistake somewhere, would be very gratifying.
