Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Certain number-theoretic methods exist for testing whether a number is prime, such as the Lucas test and Proth's test. These tests typically require factorization of n + 1, n − 1, or a similar quantity, which means that they are not useful for general-purpose primality testing, but they are often quite powerful when the tested number n is ...
Fermat's little theorem states that if p is prime and a is not divisible by p, then a p − 1 ≡ 1 ( mod p ) . {\displaystyle a^{p-1}\equiv 1{\pmod {p}}.} If one wants to test whether p is prime, then we can pick random integers a not divisible by p and see whether the congruence holds.
A prime number is a natural number that has exactly two distinct natural number divisors: the number 1 and itself. To find all the prime numbers less than or equal to a given integer n by Eratosthenes' method: Create a list of consecutive integers from 2 through n: (2, 3, 4, ..., n). Initially, let p equal 2, the smallest prime number.
The AKS primality test (also known as Agrawal–Kayal–Saxena primality test and cyclotomic AKS test) is a deterministic primality-proving algorithm created and published by Manindra Agrawal, Neeraj Kayal, and Nitin Saxena, computer scientists at the Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, on August 6, 2002, in an article titled "PRIMES is in P". [1]
The following is pseudocode which combines Atkin's algorithms 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3 [1] by using a combined set s of all the numbers modulo 60 excluding those which are multiples of the prime numbers 2, 3, and 5, as per the algorithms, for a straightforward version of the algorithm that supports optional bit-packing of the wheel; although not specifically mentioned in the referenced paper, this ...
This occurs for example when n is a probable prime to base a but not a strong probable prime to base a. [20]: 1402 If x is a nontrivial square root of 1 modulo n, since x 2 ≡ 1 (mod n), we know that n divides x 2 − 1 = (x − 1)(x + 1); since x ≢ ±1 (mod n), we know that n does not divide x − 1 nor x + 1.
Rowland (2008) proved that this sequence contains only ones and prime numbers. However, it does not contain all the prime numbers, since the terms gcd(n + 1, a n) are always odd and so never equal to 2. 587 is the smallest prime (other than 2) not appearing in the first 10,000 outcomes that are different from 1. Nevertheless, in the same paper ...
[8] [9] Although Chebyshev's paper did not prove the Prime Number Theorem, his estimates for π(x) were strong enough for him to prove Bertrand's postulate that there exists a prime number between n and 2n for any integer n ≥ 2.