Re: Sieve distinction, prime counting

jstevh_at_msn.com
Date: 03/04/05 

Date: 3 Mar 2005 17:31:38 -0800

mm@nowhere.net wrote:
<deleted>

>
> Bull***. For instance, in "Prime Numbers and Computer Methods
> for Factorization", page 14, Hans Riesel explicitely wrote :
>
> Using formula (1.9) repeatedly, we can break down any Phi(x,a)
> to the computation of Phi(x,1) which is the number of odd
> integers <= x. However, because the recursion has to be used
> many times, the evaluation is cumbersome. It is far better
> to find a way to compute Phi(x,k) for some reasonably large
> value k, and then break down the desired value Phi(x,a) just
> to Phi(x,k) and no further.
>
> That's not because the formulas don't work but because IT
> IS FAR BETTER to do so.
>

They don't work. You need to read between the lines.

I suggest you try it, and just to make it easy, I suggest you
demonstrate with the calulation of pi(10).

What you will have to do is not tell the method that 2 and 3 are prime.

Show how much you know.

I like asking for people to actually put up math with such a simple
test, especially when it's an obnoxious poster.

If I'm wrong, then I'm just wrong, and I'll stand corrected.

But you need to *show* the math this time, and not think you can just
get by with quoting from a book.

James Harris