- 03 Jun '10 19:05 / 3 editsWhilst still in my prime,

It seemed a good time

That I ask you all think

what is the integral link?

Before you all curse

This one's like my first

Though the pattern in this sequel

is not the first's equal

3/2 it did start

and the next? 1 apart!

98,218, these both over three

144244/5 is another we see

Before giving the quest,

Leaving some of you hexed...

The latest was 866 over three

Your turn now, the next one will be?...

3/2, 5/2, 98/3, 218/3, 144244/5, 866/3, ?

Apologies for the dodgy poem but there is a hint or two in there :] - 04 Jun '10 15:33Heh...cheers, though in retrospect I think I'm asking a bit too much in this particular problem, and the first number in the sequence can be argued that it doesn't belong with the standard definition of prime numbers (ie: 1 isn't a prime)

There is a skill to setting a good puzzle that I have yet to acquire! - 04 Jun '10 16:09

No no, I think you have a good point.*Originally posted by Agerg***Heh...cheers, though in retrospect I think I'm asking a bit too much in this particular problem, and the first number in the sequence can be argued that it doesn't belong with the standard definition of prime numbers (ie: 1 isn't a prime)**

There is a skill to setting a good puzzle that I have yet to acquire!

I have long argued that 1 should be considered prime, since the definition of a prime is that it "can only be divided by itself and 1" just because itself IS 1 shouldn't preclude it from being considered prime--- says I! - 04 Jun '10 16:12

If we let 1 be prime we lose the unique factorisation of the integers (up to ordering that is). No longer can we say 12 = 2 x 2 x 3, since we can also factorise it as*Originally posted by telecomladyj***No no, I think you have a good point.**

I have long argued that 1 should be considered prime, since the definition of a prime is that it "can only be divided by itself and 1" just because itself IS 1 shouldn't preclude it from being considered prime--- says I!

1 x 1 x 1 x 2 x 2 x 3 or

1 x 2 x 2 x 3 or

.

.

.

1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 2 x 2 x 3 - 04 Jun '10 16:25 / 2 edits

A non-prime is a number composed of two or more primes. Like 6=3x2. Right?*Originally posted by telecomladyj***No no, I think you have a good point.**

I have long argued that 1 should be considered prime, since the definition of a prime is that it "can only be divided by itself and 1" just because itself IS 1 shouldn't preclude it from being considered prime--- says I!

So if 1 is a prime, then 5 is a non-prime, because 5=5x1.

By including 1 in the set of primes, then you have to exclude 1 every time you want to have a unique factorization. Very impractical.

No 1 is not a prime for practical reasons.