Talk:Belphegor's prime

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Possible suggestion for deletion[edit]

Why does this exist!? 184.66.160.91 (talk) 05:52, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I do not concur that it should be entirely absent, because it is referenced in other places in Wikipedia. But is surely should be rolled into the broader article on palindromic prime numbers. LeProf 50.179.245.225 (talk) 21:14, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Then WP:RM is that way. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:28, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of inappropriate ref., and placement of references needed tag[edit]

The following reference was removed as being inappropriate as the sole reference for an article on a maths subject. It can remain here, so people are clued into its earlier history in the article, and as a followup point for editors wishing to contribute. This is a case, albeit a rare one, that it is better to have no citation at all appearing in text, than to have one that is so clearly inadequate—a human interest news report presenting the use of the term, where the notoriety is its association with a cartoon television series—as to be an embarrassment to noteworthy encyclopedia articles and verifiable sources thereof. LeProf 50.179.245.225 (talk) 21:14, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Singh, Simon (31 October 2013). "Homer Simpson's scary maths problems". BBC News. Retrieved 31 October 2013.
I replaced it. Disruptive to remove a perfectly reliable source and then tag the article as unreferenced. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:28, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You appear to imply that if it was one of several references then it might be acceptable, but if it's the only one then it's better to remove. I don't follow that logic. One reference is better than none, and it isn't as poor as you say. BBC is a reliable and respected source, Simon Singh is a notable mathematics and science writer, and it was him who brought up Belphegor's prime on his own (he explicitly said it does not appear in The Simpsons). PrimeHunter (talk) 22:30, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

History?[edit]

Very basic questions unanswered: Who first mentioned this number and how was it determined to be prime? Who named it? --172.56.0.126 (talk) 09:10, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Please feel free to do the research and improve the article! The Rambling Man (talk) 10:01, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Belphegor's prime. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:40, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Belphegor's prime. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:38, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

symbol[edit]

Tony Padilla mentions a symbol for this number in his numberphile video about it, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zk_Q9y_LNzg The symbol, which is a figure from the Voynich manuscript can be seen at http://sprott.physics.wisc.edu/pickover/pc/1000000000000066600000000000001.html --142.163.195.153 (talk) 18:59, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

other Belphegor's primes[edit]

there are some others that have been found, and it is an open question as to whether there is an infinite number of primes of this sort. https://oeis.org/A232448 --142.163.195.153 (talk) 19:07, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Belphegor's prime is a specific 31-digit prime. OEIS:A232448 is a generalization to similar primes with other lengths. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:16, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Belphegor’s Prime is the 76 number of the Fibonacci sequence and 76 numbers adds up to 13[edit]

See title 99.36.2.73 (talk) 06:22, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "and 76 numbers adds up to 13?" Evenite (talk) 01:44, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Irrelevant since it's not the 76th Fibonacci number by a long shot. (https://www.math.net/list-of-fibonacci-numbers) - DavidWBrooks (talk) 18:50, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

numbers more evil than Belphegor’s Prime[edit]

Numberphile claimed, that 1000000000000066600000000000001 would be the most evil number ("The Most" Evil Number - Numberphile). I think, the claim is incorrect.

my examples: 4000000000000066600000000000009, 5000000000000066600000000000008, 6000000000000066600000000000007, 7000000000000066600000000000006, 8000000000000066600000000000005 and 9000000000000066600000000000004

additional evil things of these numbers:

sum of ends = 13

sum of digits = 31 (thirteen reversed) 94.31.80.138 (talk) 18:11, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"beastly palindromic primes" and "Belphegor primes" are not the same[edit]

A156166: indices of primes in the sequence 16661, 1066601, 100666001, 10006660001, ...

These primes are known as Belphegor primes.

But, Ondrejka calls these "beastly palindromic primes".

This is not the same sequence as the Belphegor primes sequence.

difference between "beastly palindromic primes" and "Belphegor primes":

beastly palindromic primes (version 2): 16661, 76667, 3166613, 3466643, 7466647, ...

beastly palindromic primes (version 1): 16661, 76667, 700666007, 700000666000007, ...

Belphegor primes: 16661, 1000000000000066600000000000001, ... 94.31.83.138 (talk) 19:37, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Belphegor%27s_prime&oldid=1217596204"