Talk:Legendre prime counting function: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
(Created page with "Several questions: In principle this function has infinite recursion, so it should have a cut-off for n smaller than some number. 2? Then it is not clear how primes are counte...") |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Several questions: In principle this function has infinite recursion, so it should have a cut-off for n smaller than some number. 2? Then it is not clear how primes are counted I presume 2 is the first prime, 3 the second prime etc. Perhaps this could be made clear in the intro. The case of '1' is also a bit strange (i see 0 and 1 in the results, probably because some ambiguity in how the question is now posed/explained). |
Several questions: In principle this function has infinite recursion, so it should have a cut-off for n smaller than some number. 2? Then it is not clear how primes are counted I presume 2 is the first prime, 3 the second prime etc. Perhaps this could be made clear in the intro. The case of '1' is also a bit strange (i see 0 and 1 in the results, probably because some ambiguity in how the question is now posed/explained). |
||
I checked and indeed pi(1) should be 0 (fixed that). Yes, the first prime would be 2.--[[User:Wherrera|Wherrera]] ([[User talk:Wherrera|talk]]) 17:27, 5 August 2021 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 17:27, 5 August 2021
Several questions: In principle this function has infinite recursion, so it should have a cut-off for n smaller than some number. 2? Then it is not clear how primes are counted I presume 2 is the first prime, 3 the second prime etc. Perhaps this could be made clear in the intro. The case of '1' is also a bit strange (i see 0 and 1 in the results, probably because some ambiguity in how the question is now posed/explained).
I checked and indeed pi(1) should be 0 (fixed that). Yes, the first prime would be 2.--Wherrera (talk) 17:27, 5 August 2021 (UTC)