Let's clarify the distinction between these two types of numbers:
Unprimeable numbers are composite numbers that remain composite regardless of which single digit is changed to another. These numbers are essentially "immune" to becoming prime through a single-digit modification in base 10, with 200 being the smallest example.
Key Facts about Unprimeable Numbers:
- Definition: A composite number is unprimeable if changing one digit to any other digit (0-9) never produces a prime number.
- Smallest Examples: The sequence begins 200, 204, 206, 208, 320, 322, 324, 325, 326, 328, ....
- Example Case (200): Modifying the first, second, or third digit of 200 always results in a composite number (e.g., changing 200 to 100, 300, 210, 201, etc.).
- Differentiation: They are sometimes confused with "weakly primes", which are actual prime numbers that cannot be turned into a different prime by changing a single digit.
The reason that I sought the clarification is that the number associated with my diurnal age today, 28151, has a property that allows it membership of OEIS A186995:
The initial members of this sequence, up to base 16, are:
127, 2, 373, 83, 28151, 223, 6211, 2789, 294001, 3347, 20837899, 4751, 6588721, 484439, 862789
28151 corresponds to base 6 where it has the representation 334155. This large value surprised me and so I asked Gemini:
OEIS A186995 lists the smallest weak prime in base n and it begins with 127, 2, 373, 83, 28151, 223, 6211, 2789, 294001, 3347, 20837899, 4751, 6588721, 484439, 862789 etc. starting with n=2. When we get to n=6, the base 6 equivalent of 28151 is 334155 but I find it hard to believe that in the first 28150 base 6 numbers there are none that are weakly prime. Can you explain how this is so in the case of base 6.
This was the response:
The reason the smallest weakly prime number in base 6 jumps so drastically to 28151 (which is 334155 in base 6) lies in the prime factorization of the base itself. Because 6 is the product of the two smallest prime numbers, 2 and 3, it creates a mathematical "divisibility shield" that makes it statistically extremely difficult for a base 6 number to qualify as weakly prime.
Here is the step-by-step mechanics of how this works:
The Mechanics of Digit Substitution
In base 6, a number N is constructed from its digits as:
N = dk 6k + dk-1 6k-1 + … + d1 61 + d0 60For a number to be weakly prime, it must first be prime. If N is prime (and greater than 3), it cannot be divisible by 2 or 3. This means it must be an odd number, and it cannot be a multiple of 3.
When you modify a digit di to a new value c (where c is between 0 and 5), the difference between the new number and the original prime N is exactly (c − di) 6i.
The Divisibility Shield
For any digit position i ≥ 1, the place value 6i is always a multiple of 6. Therefore, the difference (c − di) 6i is always an even number and always a multiple of 3.
When you add or subtract a multiple of 2 and 3 to a prime number N, the resulting number maintains the exact same divisibility properties as N modulo 2 and modulo 3. Consequently, any substitution made to the 61, 62, 63 … positions will never produce a number divisible by 2 or 3.
The Statistical Improbability
To satisfy the weakly prime condition, every possible digit substitution must result in a composite number.
In the general integer population, about 66.7% of all numbers are composite simply by being even or a multiple of 3. However, because of the divisibility shield, none of the modified numbers from the higher digit positions can take this "easy" path to being composite. They are forced into the remaining 33.3% of the number line—numbers coprime to 6—where the density of primes is three times higher.
For 334155 in base 6, there are 5 higher digit positions (i ≥ 1), and changing them to the other 5 valid digits yields 25 different modified numbers. All 25 of these must simultaneously be composite, but their prime factors must be drawn exclusively from larger primes (5, 7, 11, 13, etc.). Finding a cluster where 25 specific numbers coprime to 6 all happen to hit composite numbers requires venturing much further up the number line, which is why the sequence jumps so violently to 28151.
You can observe this exact same behavior in OEIS A186995 whenever the base has multiple distinct prime factors. For base 10 (factors 2 and 5), the smallest weakly prime is 294001. For base 12 (factors 2 and 3), it rockets to 20837899. Conversely, in a prime base like base 5 (where the answer is just 83), changing a higher digit easily flips the number from odd to even, quickly satisfying the composite requirement.
No comments:
Post a Comment