Re: loose ends

From: George Murphy (gmurphy@raex.com)
Date: Sat Aug 02 2003 - 22:03:49 EDT

  • Next message: Glenn Morton: "RE: loose ends"

    Glenn Morton wrote:
    >
    > Josh wrote in answer to Brian's question about the Fibonacci series:
    >
    > >-----Original Message-----
    > >From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
    > >Behalf Of Josh Bembenek
    > >Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 10:08 PM
    >
    > >Let me first state that I cannot speak for every last nuance of what the
    > >word specification means to either ID or myself. However it appears to be
    > >the case as some flowering plants and other biotic creatures display (if
    > >this is where you are going...)
    > >
    >
    > The Fibonacci sequence is really no different than primes. They are a subset
    > of real numbers which match a recipe. Indeed all sequences like this match
    > recipes of one sort or another. The primes match the recipe that they are
    > only divisible evenly by one and by themselves. Fibonacci numbers match the
    > recipe that they are the sum of the last two numbers in the series.

            There is a basic difference between the Fibonacci sequence & the primes. As you
    note, there is a formula with which one can generate as many members of the 1st sequence
    as you wish. But there is no general formula for generating primes (unless there's been
    a new discovery I haven't heard of, a possibility since I'm hardly a number theorist).
    All proposed prime-generating formulas have been found to break down at some point.

                                            Shalom,
                                            George

    George L. Murphy
    gmurphy@raex.com
    http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Aug 02 2003 - 22:02:36 EDT