>pattern in prime numbers clearly existsTherefore prime number factorization is just a matter of time to be in polynomial time, right?
>>17015786its always polynomial time as long as you only consider a finite amount of primes
>>17015787Yea except you would have direct solutions instead of bruteforce
>>17015786yes anon anything with a pattern can be computed in polynomial time
Klauber triangle is superior but doesn't activate people's schizo receptors as well
>>17015786Prime patterns aren't patterns in primes but patterns in absence of primes which human pattern seeking mind interprets as pattern in the primes. They all stem from the fact that 2, 3, 5 and other small primes are "taken" and all their multiples vanish from any graph which when you blow up the graph into large size creates large clearly recognizable dead zones at their multiples. The dead zones make it look like the primes follow some pattern but it gives no predictive power about any new prime except the trivial case that any new prime is not the product of any previous prime.
multiples of 2, 3, 5, or 7 in white
>>17015995>>17015816looks like it should be plotted in N dimensional space rather than 2D, maybe 3D would help?
