Talk:Zeisel number

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

At least one other person besides myself has worked on the temp page Zeisel number/Temp. I think it's time for a sysop to take action to resolve this issue.

On the temp page I delinked 1419 because there currently is no interest in making an article on that number. Also, I need to look up whether Helmut Zeisel is Austrian, as the previous writer stated. PrimeFan 21:30, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I haven't gotten around to checking Zeisel's ancestry. Indeed, it appears I need to do some research on the history of Zeisel numbers. There are plenty of sources on the Web on the mathematical aspect, but not as many on the historical aspect. PrimeFan 17:58, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

With respect to the history I can confirm that I am Austrian and that I am the author of the mentioned newsgroup posting. For the rest of the history you have to contact Kevin Brown who is AFAIK also the autor of the mathpages article. Helmut Zeisel, 25 Sep 2004.

Wow, it's such an honor to converse with a mathematician of your stature. I hope our collaborative effort on the numbers named after you meets with your approval. PrimeFan 22:46, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Acutally I did not contribute anything to these numbers except of the original newsgroup posting: http://groups.google.de/groups?q=brown+zeisel+1885+prime&hl=de&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=0097A8D9.ED374120.20622%40indmath.uni-linz.ac.at&rnum=1 That is also the reason why I think the name "Brown-Zeisel numbers" would be more accurate. Helmut Zeisel, 27 Sep 2004.

I see. Ultimately, the main factor which Wikipedia considers is the commonness of the term. Wolfram's Mathworld may have helped to ingrain the term "Zeisel number" on the minds of thousands of mathematics professionals and amateurs alike. The term "Brown-Zeisel number", even if it doesn't stick, might at least merit a redirect. Comments, anyone else? PrimeFan 21:47, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Does it have to yied a prime?

I thought that the factors satisfying the recurrence pattern was all that was necessary for a number to be a Zeisel number. 1885 when plugged into 2^(k-1)+k yields a prime, (or at least I have to take MathPage's word for it), but 105 does not. 2^(105 - 1) + 105 = 20282409603651670423947251286121 = 11 * 53 * 344791 * 100900907731404374438857. Anton Mravcek 19:07, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] are all Zeisel Numers pseudoprime?

I conjecture, that all Zeisel Numbers are Pseudoprime Numbers. Some of the Zeisel Numbers are Carmichael Numbers of the form (6n+1)*(12n+1)*(18n*1), which are also Pseudoprime Numbers. And every Zeisel Number between 105 and 24211 is pseudoprime. --217.233.245.228 01:11, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)