[HN Gopher] Prime Numbers So Memorable That People Hunt for Them
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Prime Numbers So Memorable That People Hunt for Them
        
       Author : georgecmu
       Score  : 79 points
       Date   : 2025-01-18 14:41 UTC (3 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.scientificamerican.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.scientificamerican.com)
        
       | slwvx wrote:
       | The title of the Scientific American article is "These Prime
       | Numbers Are So Memorable That People Hunt for Them", which
       | matches the content much better than the title above.
        
       | lehi wrote:
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belphegor%27s_prime
       | 
       | "666" with 13 0's on either side and 1's on the ends.
        
         | yapyap wrote:
         | wow, evil pi.
         | 
         | very interesting, thanks for sharing.
        
         | idiotsecant wrote:
         | It also works with no zeros, or all sorts of other number of
         | zeros. Dude basically just added zeros until the number got
         | cooler.
        
           | shagie wrote:
           | The palindromic Belphegor numbers https://oeis.org/A232449
           | 
           | Indices of Belphegor primes: numbers k such that the decimal
           | number https://oeis.org/A232448
        
         | fuzzythinker wrote:
         | "on both sides" because "on either side" to me meant it may be
         | duo of 1-13zeros-6661 and 1666-13zeros-1.
         | 
         | More for those who don't click the link, other Belphegor primes
         | numbers are with the following number of zeros in both ends
         | (and 1 to cap off the ends): 0, 13, 42, 506, 608, 2472, 2623,
         | maybe more.
        
           | sdwr wrote:
           | "to either side" or "on either side" commonly means "on both
           | sides"
           | 
           | "Either" has two meanings:
           | 
           | - verb-wise, it separates different options (you can have
           | either X or Y)
           | 
           | - noun-wise, it refers to two similar groups (there was no
           | light on either side of the bridge, or, conversely, the
           | bridge was lit on either side)
        
             | jjtheblunt wrote:
             | (Native speaker) i read either in the sense of logical or,
             | so one side alone (tegardless of which side) or both sides
             | at once.
             | 
             | Interesting how varied the ohrasing can be read, though!
        
             | quuxplusone wrote:
             | Indeed. "On either side the river lie / Long fields of
             | barley and of rye" --Tennyson
        
         | TeMPOraL wrote:
         | > _Belphegor (or Baal Peor, Hebrew: ba'`al-p@'`vor ba'al-p@'or
         | - "Lord of the Gap") is, in the Abrahamic religions, a demon
         | associated with one of the seven deadly sins. According to
         | religious tradition, he helps people make discoveries. He
         | seduces people by proposing incredible inventions that will
         | make them rich._
         | 
         | Huh. Would feel right at home in our industry.
         | 
         | > _According to some demonologists from the 17th century, his
         | powers are strongest in April._
         | 
         | Any demo days or other significant VC stuff happening in April?
         | 
         | > _The German bishop and witch hunter, Peter Binsfeld (ca.
         | 1540-ca.1600) wrote that Belphegor tempts through laziness.
         | According to Binsfeld 's Classification of Demons, Belphegor is
         | the main demon of the deadly sin known as sloth in the
         | Christian tradition. The anonymous author of the Lollard tract
         | The Lanterne of Light, however, believed Belphegor to embody
         | the sin of gluttony rather than sloth._
         | 
         | Yeah, hits too close to home.
         | 
         | Via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belphegor
        
           | WorldMaker wrote:
           | > Any demo days or other significant VC stuff happening in
           | April?
           | 
           | Lots of tech companies plan elaborate demos for April 1st,
           | for some foolish reason. It certainly gets very busy on HN
           | keeping up.
        
           | vdjskshi wrote:
           | Sounds like the patron saint of LLMs
        
           | miki123211 wrote:
           | How was this never mentioned in Unsong? Not a single time?
        
             | TeMPOraL wrote:
             | IDK, I guess Scott Alexander didn't do his research
             | _thoroughly enough_. Still, UNSONG is already pretty much a
             | fractal of references and callouts to such things.
             | 
             | On that note, how is it I've never seen anyone connecting
             | the famous "God of the gaps"[0] with a demon literally
             | named "Lord of the Gap"?
             | 
             | (In case no one really did, let history and search engines
             | mark this comment as the first.)
             | 
             | --
             | 
             | [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps
        
           | gpderetta wrote:
           | Makes sense, with laziness being one of the three virtues of
           | a great programmer.
        
       | nurumaik wrote:
       | Since divisibility by 2 and 5 is such a problem, why not look for
       | memorable numbers in prime base, like base 7 or base 11?
        
         | Retr0id wrote:
         | If we allow non-decimal bases, (2^n)-1 works for a lot of
         | memorable values of n (e.g. 2, 3, 5, 7... and 31, per the
         | article), or some less memorable but very long values of n,
         | like 136279841
         | 
         | They're all technically palindromes in base-2.
        
         | elcomet wrote:
         | I can't tell if this is a joke if if you're serious
        
         | euroderf wrote:
         | Why do we care about base 10 ? Because we have five digits per
         | appendage ? BFD. Accident of evolution.
         | 
         | What about palindromes in binary ? That's about as close to a
         | mathematical ideal as we could get. Yes?
         | 
         | Let's see. decimal 11 = binary 1011, its palindrome = 1101 =
         | decimal 13, GOLD!
        
         | aidenn0 wrote:
         | https://oeis.org/A260871
        
       | geoffcampbell64 wrote:
       | https://archive.ph/O8BOs
        
       | pavlov wrote:
       | Maybe there's a prime number that makes a mildly interesting
       | picture when rendered in base-2 in a 8*8 grid.
       | 
       | Should somebody spend time looking at all the primes that fit in
       | the grid? Absolutely not.
        
         | pavel_lishin wrote:
         | > _Should somebody spend time looking at all the primes that
         | fit in the grid? Absolutely not._
         | 
         | Why not?
        
           | pavlov wrote:
           | True, it's not any of my business.
           | 
           | Maybe superhuman AI will have humans do this kind of work to
           | make us feel useful. "Oh, you're right, does look a bit like
           | a duck! Fun! You're doing so well helping me discover the
           | secrets of the universe! I enjoy working with people."
        
         | andrewla wrote:
         | You can create your own using PARI/GP. To render the HN prime
         | (a prime that has "HN" graphically with some garbage at the
         | end, just go to [1] and type in:                   a =
         | nextprime(0b1\         0000000000000000\
         | 0100001010000010\         0100001011000010\
         | 0100001010100010\         0111111010010010\
         | 0100001010001010\         0100001010000110\
         | 0100001010000010\         0000000000000000\
         | 0000000000000000\         )
         | 
         | 1461507431067219818927492061258791363947404460153 is the HN
         | prime (it looks better in binary and split to length-16 lines)
         | >>> print("\n".join([bin(14615074310672198189274920612587913639
         | 47404460153)[3:][a*16:a*16+16] for a in range(10)]))
         | 0000000000000000         0100001010000010
         | 0100001011000010         0100001010100010
         | 0111111010010010         0100001010001010
         | 0100001010000110         0100001010000010
         | 0000000000000000         0000000001111001
         | 
         | [1] https://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/gpwasm.html
        
       | gmuslera wrote:
       | Reminds me the demonstration that all whole numbers are
       | interesting in a way or another. Being memorable in this case is
       | not so much about memory but about having an easy to notice
       | pattern of digits, or a clear trivial algorithm to build them.
        
         | pavel_lishin wrote:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interesting_number_paradox
         | 
         | > _The interesting number paradox is a humorous paradox which
         | arises from the attempt to classify every natural number as
         | either "interesting" or "uninteresting". The paradox states
         | that every natural number is interesting.[1] The "proof" is by
         | contradiction: if there exists a non-empty set of uninteresting
         | natural numbers, there would be a smallest uninteresting number
         | - but the smallest uninteresting number is itself interesting
         | because it is the smallest uninteresting number, thus producing
         | a contradiction._
        
           | shagie wrote:
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxicab_number
           | 
           | The name is derived from a conversation ca. 1919 involving
           | mathematicians G. H. Hardy and Srinivasa Ramanujan. As told
           | by Hardy:
           | 
           | I remember once going to see him [Ramanujan] when he was
           | lying ill at Putney. I had ridden in taxi-cab No. 1729, and
           | remarked that the number seemed to be rather a dull one, and
           | that I hoped it was not an unfavourable omen. "No," he
           | replied, "it is a very interesting number; it is the smallest
           | number expressible as the sum of two cubes in two different
           | ways."
        
           | jmount wrote:
           | Can also consider variations of this such as
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berry_paradox or even the very
           | general https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorites_paradox
        
       | susam wrote:
       | As soon as I read the title of this post, the anecdote about the
       | Grothendieck prime came to mind. Sure enough, the article kicks
       | off with that very story! The article also links to
       | https://www.ams.org/notices/200410/fea-grothendieck-part2.pd...
       | which has an account of this anecdote. But the article does not
       | reproduce the anecdote as stated in the linked document. So allow
       | me to share it here as I've always found it quite amusing:
       | 
       | > One striking characteristic of Grothendieck's mode of thinking
       | is that it seemed to rely so little on examples. This can be seen
       | in the legend of the so-called "Grothendieck prime". In a
       | mathematical conversation, someone suggested to Grothendieck that
       | they should consider a particular prime number. "You mean an
       | actual number?" Grothendieck asked. The other person replied,
       | yes, an actual prime number. Grothendieck suggested, "All right,
       | take 57."
        
         | zellyn wrote:
         | One of my pet hobbies is trying to figure out the least prime
         | prime number and most prime composite numbers under 100.
         | 
         | My votes are 61 or 89 for least prime-seeming primes and 87 and
         | --yep-- 57 for more prime-seeming composites.
        
           | xigoi wrote:
           | I once wrote in a Math Olympiad solution that 87 is prime.
           | Not my brightest moment.
        
           | im3w1l wrote:
           | I'm gonna vote 91, since it has large divisors that can't be
           | seen at a glance. 57 and 87 fall apart if you remember that
           | 60 and 90 are divisible by 3.
        
         | bhasi wrote:
         | But it's not prime - what am I missing? Why is this anecdote
         | significant?
        
           | bongodongobob wrote:
           | Yeah I don't get it either.
        
       | lpolovets wrote:
       | Not quite the same, but this reminds me of bitcoin, where miners
       | are on the hunt for SHA hashes that start with a bunch of zeroes
       | in a row (which one could say is memorable/unusual)
        
       | quuxplusone wrote:
       | A few other memorable primes:
       | 
       | https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/2420488/what-is-tri...
       | 888888888888888888888888888888
       | 888888888888888888888888888888
       | 888888888888888888888888888888
       | 888111111111111111111111111888
       | 888111111111111111111111111888
       | 888111111811111111118111111888
       | 888111118811111111118811111888
       | 888111188811111111118881111888
       | 888111188811111111118881111888
       | 888111888811111111118888111888
       | 888111888881111111188888111888
       | 888111888888111111888888111888
       | 888111888888888888888888111888
       | 888111888888888888888888111888
       | 888111888888888888888888111888
       | 888811188888888888888881118888
       | 188811188888888888888881118881
       | 188881118888888888888811188881
       | 118888111888888888888111888811
       | 111888811118888888811118888111
       | 111188881111111111111188881111
       | 111118888111111111111888811111
       | 111111888811111111118888111111
       | 111111188881111111188881111111
       | 111111118888811118888811111111
       | 111111111888881188888111111111
       | 111111111118888888811111111111
       | 111111111111888888111111111111
       | 111111111111118811111111111111
       | 111111111111111111111111111111
       | 062100000000000000000000000000
       | 000000000000000000000000000000
       | 000000000000000000000000000000
       | 000000000000000000000000000000
       | 000000000000000000000000000000
       | 000000000000000000000000000000
       | 000000000000000000000000000000
       | 000000000000000000000000000000
       | 000000000000000000000000000000
       | 000000000000000000000000000000
       | 000000000000000000000000000000
       | 000000000000000000000000000000
       | 000000000000000000000000000000
       | 000000000000000000000000000000
       | 000000000000000000000000000001
       | 
       | https://codegolf.stackexchange.com/questions/146017/output-t...
       | 777777777777777777777777777777777777777
       | 777777777777777777777777777777777777777
       | 777777777777777777777777777777777777777
       | 777777777777777777777777777777777777777
       | 111111111111111111111111111111111111111
       | 111111111111111111111111111111111111111
       | 188888888118888888811188888811188888811
       | 188111118818811111881881111881881111881
       | 188111118818811111881881111111881111111
       | 188888888118888888811881111111881118888
       | 188111111118811111111881111111881111881
       | 188111111118811111111881111881881111881
       | 188111111118811111111188888811188888811
       | 111111111111111111111111111111111111111
       | 111111111111111111111111111111111111111
       | 333333333333333333333333333333333333333
       | 
       | https://www.reddit.com/r/math/comments/a9544e/merry_christma...
       | 20181111111111111111111111111111111111
       | 11111111111111111166111111111111111111
       | 11111111111111111868011111111111111111
       | 11111111111111118886301111111111111111
       | 11111111111111168863586111111111111111
       | 11111111111111803608088361111111111111
       | 11111111111193386838898668111111111111
       | 11111111111111163508800111111111111111
       | 11111111111111806560885611111111111111
       | 11111111111118630808083861111111111111
       | 11111111111585688085086853511111111111
       | 11111111116355560388530533881111111111
       | 11111111506383308388080803858311111111
       | 11111183585588536538563360080880111111
       | 11111111111118383588055585111111111111
       | 11111111111568838588536853611111111111
       | 11111111118830583888838553631111111111
       | 11111111808885338530655586888811111111
       | 11111183886860888066566368806366111111
       | 11115385585036885386888980683008381111
       | 11055880566883886086806355803583885511
       | 11111111111111111685311111111111111111
       | 11111111111111111863311111111111111111
       | 11111111111111111035611111111111111111
        
         | jmward01 wrote:
         | These are great! I wonder if Carl Sagan knew about them when
         | writing Contact. The movie doesn't go into the part of the book
         | that is relevant here (trying to avoid spoilers but if you read
         | the book you know!)
        
           | quuxplusone wrote:
           | Here's a previous HN submission about finding Waldo in pi
           | (spoiler: only by cheating significantly re what counts as
           | "Waldo"): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30872676
           | 
           | I googled around trying to figure out what year James McKee
           | created the Trinity Hall prime. The internet is (IMO)
           | presenting it mainly as some kind of Wonder of the Ancient
           | World -- with the date of creation conveniently filed off.
           | The first post below claims that the year McKee left
           | Cambridge and created the prime was 1996. It seems to have
           | hit peak internet presence only in the 2010s, though, so I
           | wish there were an authoritative source to confirm (or deny)
           | the 1996 date.
           | 
           | https://www.bradyharanblog.com/blog/artistic-prime-numbers
           | 
           | https://www.futilitycloset.com/2017/09/10/trinity-hall-
           | prime...
           | 
           | https://www.futilitycloset.com/2020/01/12/more-prime-images/
        
       | xigency wrote:
       | Doesn't take very much searching to find this pretty nifty
       | palindrome prime:
       | 
       | 3,212,123 (the 333rd palindrome prime)
       | 
       | Interestingly, there are no four digit palindrome primes because
       | they would be divisible by 11. This is obvious in retrospect but
       | I found this fact by giving NotebookLM a big list of palindrome
       | primes (just to see what it could possibly say about it over a
       | podcast).
       | 
       | For the curious, here's a small set of the palindrome primes:
       | http://brainplex.net/pprimes.txt
       | 
       | The format is x. y. z. n signifying the x-th prime#, y-th
       | palindrome#, z-th palindrome-prime#, and the number (n).
       | [Starting from 2]
        
       | Retric wrote:
       | > Sloane calls them "memorable" primes
       | 
       | Excluding 11 seems arbitrary here.
        
       | dchichkov wrote:
       | ChatGPT o1:
       | https://chatgpt.com/share/678feedb-0b2c-8001-bd77-4e574502e4...
       | 
       | > Thought about large prime check for 3m 52s: _" Despite its
       | interesting pattern of digits, 12,345,678,910,987,654,321 is
       | definitely not prime. It is a large composite number with no
       | small prime factors."_
       | 
       | Feels like this Online Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences (OEIS)
       | would be a good candidate for a hallucination benchmark...
        
         | scotty79 wrote:
         | I think firmly marrying llms with symbolic math
         | calculator/database, so they can check things they don't really
         | know "by heart" would go a long way towards making them seem
         | smart.
         | 
         | I really hope Wolfram is working on LLM that is trying to learn
         | what it means to be WolframAlpha user.
        
       | fxtentacle wrote:
       | 34567876543
       | 
       | 333 2 111 2 333
       | 
       | 1111 4 7 4 1111
       | 
       | 35753 3 35753
       | 
       | At one time, in university, I wrote a tool to aesthetically score
       | primes.
        
       | lambertsimnel wrote:
       | ...in decimal.
       | 
       | https://t5k.org/notes/words.html points out that "When we work in
       | base 36 all the letters are used - hence all words are numbers."
       | Primes can be especially memorable in base 36. "Did," "nun," and
       | "pop" are base-36 primes, as is "primetest" and many others.
        
       | stevelosh wrote:
       | If you were around in the 80's and 90's you might have already
       | memorized the prime 8675309
       | (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/867-5309/Jenny). It's also a twin
       | prime, so you can add 2 to get another prime (8675311).
        
       | gregschlom wrote:
       | On the topic of palindromic numbers, I remember being fascinated
       | as a kid with the fact that if you square the number formed by
       | repeating the digit 1 between 1 and 9 times (e.g. 111,111^2) you
       | get a palindrome of the form 123...n...321 with n being the
       | number of 1s you squared.
       | 
       | The article talks about a very similar number: 2^31-1, which is
       | 12345678910987654321, whereas 1111111111^2 is
       | 12345678900987654321
        
         | ColinWright wrote:
         | You have misunderstood or mis-read the article ... 2^{31}-1 is
         | not 12345678910987654321.
         | 
         | Specifically, 2^{31}-1 = 2147483647.
         | 
         |  _Borel asked Dyson to name a prime number and, unlike
         | Grothendieck, Dyson provided a number that is only divisible by
         | 1 and itself: 2^{31) - 1._
         | 
         |  _But that reply did not satisfy Borel. He wanted Dyson to
         | recite all of the digits of a large prime number._
         | 
         |  _Dyson fell silent, so after a moment, Sloane jumped in and
         | said, "1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2,
         | 1."_
         | 
         | So Sloane was supplying a different prime, but one where he
         | could recite all the digits.
        
           | gregschlom wrote:
           | Oh, thank you. Knowing very well that 2^32 is around 4
           | billion, I should have immediately noticed that
           | 12345678910987654321 is way to big to be 2^31
        
       | jonhohle wrote:
       | I there any more l33t prime than 31337?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-01-21 23:01 UTC)