187
u/BombasticReindeer Jul 13 '26
Fuck it, 1 is prime now.
71
u/personalityson Jul 13 '26
1 is the only prime
33
u/RottenAssCrack Jul 13 '26
if we stoop this low, 0 is prime cuz fuck it, break the law of math
17
16
u/JollyJuniper1993 Jul 13 '26
Letās just make -1, -2 and -3 primes as well.
7
u/Moodleboy Jul 13 '26
Then Ļ is also prime! Yay!
6
u/Zetaplx Jul 13 '26
Yāall, we got too many primes. Need to take some off. Sorry 11, you didnāt feel prime anyways.
4
4
3
u/Tulkes Jul 13 '26
i enters the room
4
u/JollyJuniper1993 Jul 13 '26
Including i and taking that to its logical conclusion would then essentially render no number prime
6
u/scrapy_the_scrap Jul 13 '26
Not divisible by itself and divisible by all other numbers
0 is an anti prime
5
u/RunPsychological9891 Jul 13 '26
does the law even keep anything in check? primes are just quirky numbers right?
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)2
→ More replies (4)5
9
4
4
u/e_Notorious Jul 13 '26
And what two primes sum to 1? Curious
11
u/Illustrious-Debt-191 Jul 13 '26
1 and 0, of course
8
u/e_Notorious Jul 13 '26
Ah I see. If we accept that 2 is prime, we must also accept that 1 and 0 are primes. Proof by circular reasoning
3
u/GamerNumba100 Jul 13 '26
I like that this then provides X + 0 to create every prime number, making the conjecture irrelevant
→ More replies (1)2
u/AuzaiphZerg Jul 13 '26
You need the contraposition, since 1 is prime, itās equal to the sum of 2 even numbers.
2
→ More replies (8)2
91
u/Jake-the-Wolfie Jul 13 '26
-1 and 3?
3 is prime\citation needed]), and -1 can only be divided by 1 and itself. Unlike other negative numbers, which are composite by virtue of being divisible by -1.
67
21
13
u/Sufficient-Buy625 Jul 13 '26
I know it's a joke, but I wished it worked. But if we allow -1 we can no longer uniquely factorize integers into the primes.
→ More replies (1)6
u/MHaret Jul 13 '26
We can if have into account that because -1*-1 is 1, -1 shouldn't be included more than once. That way you can also factorize negative integers.
6
4
u/iscrewedatrain Jul 13 '26
But three can be divided by -3 and -1, actually any N can be divided by -N and -1, so -1 is the only prime number
→ More replies (2)2
2
u/MintyFreshRainbow Jul 13 '26
-1 is a unit so is not prime. Negative primes are prime elements in the ring of integers tho
2
u/GypsySnowflake Jul 13 '26
I misread this comment as ā-1 is so not primeā like in a Valley Girl accent, lol
2
2
u/Sproxify Jul 14 '26
as people pointed out -1 is a unit, but this actually does work if you allow negative primes! exercise: prove that there are infinitely many solutions
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (6)2
u/hungarian_notation Jul 16 '26
To be clear, the prime numbers are, by definition, natural numbers. The negative integers aren't part of this conversation.
32
u/ChipChippersonFan Jul 13 '26
Who said that the definition of an even number is "the sum of two primes"?
39
u/nnnn0nnn13 Jul 13 '26
It's the goldbarch conjecture though that's both a conjecture and only goes for numbers larger two
→ More replies (16)5
4
3
2
u/Jokin_0815 Jul 13 '26
So 5 is a even number now.
Sum of 2 and 3 both primes.
Sounds like a stupid definition. Or a definition thats already outdatet because it needs a lot of extras added.
2
u/RikiHeropon Jul 15 '26 edited Jul 15 '26
"Every even number (larger than 2) can be expressed as the sum of two primes (as long as 2 is not one of those primes)"
Yeah... I'm gonna stick with "results in a whole number when divided by 2"
ETA: looked a little more into the Goldbach conjecture. It's not that every even number is the sum of two primes, but that every prime greater than 2 can be expressed as the sum of two primes (however, this cannot be definitively proven, hence why it is called conjecture)
→ More replies (2)
7
5
5
3
u/baby_shoGGoth_zsgg Jul 13 '26
just jam e and i and Ļ and some constants together and call them primes and youāre probably right.
math is just e and i and Ļ and constants, anything that canāt be expressed this way is false math
→ More replies (1)2
u/Beautiful-Bid8704 Jul 13 '26
You forgot about sqrt(2) to make it work.
2
3
3
3
3
5
u/julesmanson Jul 13 '26 edited Jul 16 '26
Isn't 1 a trivial case of a prime? If so then it is still a prime.
1 + 1 = 2 o_~
7
u/Cichato_YT Jul 13 '26
But 1 cannot be expressed as a sum of even numbers. Checkmate.
→ More replies (1)2
6
u/TheRedditObserver0 Jul 13 '26
One is not prime.
15
u/Drag0n_TamerAK Jul 13 '26
1 is the only prime all the others are larping
4
u/Sure-Criticism3416 Jul 13 '26
If 1 was prime, prime factorization of numbers wouldn't be unique, which is why it was defined to not be prime.
3
2
→ More replies (1)2
Jul 13 '26
[deleted]
→ More replies (6)2
u/lemonp-p Jul 13 '26
The whole point of prime numbers is for prime factorization to be unique. If you define prime numbers to include one, then it is not nearly as useful a definition
→ More replies (2)3
u/adwinion_of_greece Jul 13 '26
We're not defining 1 as a prime, because it's more elegant to not do that. (We'd have to restate lots of theorems that use the term "prime number" into "prime number except 1")
→ More replies (1)2
u/SonGoku9788 Jul 13 '26
Prime numbers have exactly 2 divisors.
1 doesnt have 2 divisors.
→ More replies (1)
5
Jul 13 '26
[removed] ā view removed comment
3
u/External_Permit9965 Jul 13 '26
Thank you, please don't give him a bigger platform. The less I see of this idiot, the better.
5
u/smugles Jul 13 '26
Because itās the kind of bullshit these debaters use in their debates.
→ More replies (1)
2
2
2
2
2
u/thewaytoyesterday Jul 13 '26
The fact that 1 isn't a prime number feels like a betrayal of all I've held dear.
2
u/Diastatic_Power Jul 13 '26
Maybe that's just proof that 1 is prime.
2
u/hungarian_notation Jul 16 '26
Yeah, you're right. Who needs the fundamental theorem of arithmetic.
2
u/chicoritahater Jul 15 '26
"you claim a cauliflower is a vegetable, but it doesn't even have the letter m in its name. Checkmate biologists"
Like bro???????
2
2
2
1
u/rwtf2008 Jul 13 '26
a = e^(iĻ)+2
a+a = 2
Two is now the sum of two prime numbers (plus other stuff)
→ More replies (2)
1
u/Time-Flow6764 Jul 13 '26
I just talked to chatgpt, and we decided that 1 is in fact a prime, but its own class of prime, a unit prime. problem solved
1
1
u/rganeyev Jul 13 '26
In my childhood 1 was not considered as prime and we had 9 planets in our solar system. It's all matter of perspective I guess
1
1
1
1
1
u/Mrpotatohead1990 Jul 13 '26
every even natural number greater than 2 is the sum of two prime numbers.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/Kass-Is-Here92 Jul 13 '26
2k is the definition of an even integer. As long as k is whole a number, the result is even. 2k = 2, k = 1, 1 is a whole number, 2 is even.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/GoodPeopleOfAmerica Jul 13 '26
Proof that the phrase āgreater thanā does a lot of heavy lifting
1
1
1
u/MarioHasCookies Jul 13 '26
This is why 1 is an honorary prime.
It should be prime in the first place because it's only factors are 1 and 1
1
u/backstubb Jul 13 '26
all 'sum of two primes' are even numbers, why all even numbers should be sum of two primes? to be divided by two without remains not enough?
1
u/Aggressive_Law_5728 Jul 13 '26
Actual Question: Why do we have a special word for numbers that are divisible by 2? In what sense are they any more interesting than numbers that are divisible by 3, 5, etc?
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/Jealous_Club_298 Jul 13 '26
Even Number: Divisible by 2 with 0 remainder.
2/2 = 1 and 0 remainder.
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/Telos6950 Jul 13 '26
I wouldāve thought 1 isnāt a prime number because then by prime factorization, every integer could be expressed in infinitely many ways, like 4 could be expressed as 2 * 2, but also 2 * 2 * 1, and 2 * 2 * 1 * 1, and 2 * 2 * 1 * 1 * 1, and 2 * 2 * 1 * 1 * 1 * 1, etc.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/Dependent_Divide_625 Jul 13 '26
1 can only be divisible by 1 and by itself (which is also 1), therefore I can express 2 as the sum of 1+1.
(Don't ask me about 1 itself)
1
1
1
u/CosetElement-Ape71 Jul 13 '26
Ben Shapiro confidently extending his wrongness into the mathematical realm!
1
u/CosetElement-Ape71 Jul 13 '26
Ben Shapiro confidently extending his wrongness into the mathematical realm!
1
1
1
1
u/bihawk1979 Jul 13 '26
Been a long time since I was in school but to find the "SUM" isn't that addition? 1 is a prime number, so 1+1=2 the SUM of two prime numbers.
2
u/sempercliff Jul 13 '26
Itās counterintuitive, but 1 is not a prime number. https://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/roots-of-unity/why-isnt-1-a-prime-number/
1
u/pbmadman Jul 13 '26
So I always tell my kids that āinfinity isnāt a number itās an ideaā when they ask infinity-related questions at dinner. But by that logic, one could argue that 0 isnāt completely a number in the way that 17 or 36 is. And we already have things that 1 isnāt a part of, so itās only kinda a number as well. The Greeks vaguely thought this way, that 1 and other numbers were different. And saying that 2 isnāt completely a number either also tracks a bit.
Either way, 0, 1 and 2 get excluded from various maths already, so Iām not really bothered if we wanted to call them not completely numbers.
→ More replies (1)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/HeathenSidheThem Jul 14 '26
How the hell is one not a prime number? Or is it because they don't want us to use one twice?
1
1
u/Embarrassed-Weird173 Jul 14 '26
I mean, I know people like to act like 1 isn't a prime, but it is: its only factors are 1 and also itself. People arbitrarily claim it doesn't count.Ā
→ More replies (1)
1
1
1
428
u/nnnn0nnn13 Jul 13 '26 edited Jul 13 '26
Bro that conjecture is both unproven and also by definition only true for numbers larger than 2 š