
Re: Plotting axes and the dimensions using tiles in 2D space
Posted:
Mar 11, 2014 10:50 PM


On 3/10/2014 10:55 PM, Hlauk wrote: > On Monday, March 10, 2014 11:53:15 PM UTC4, Hlauk wrote: >> On Monday, March 10, 2014 8:40:16 PM UTC4, James Waldby wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 15:35:36 0700, Hlauk wrote: >> >>> >> >>> ... >> >>> >> >>>> On a 3d grid x,y,z,xyz,x,y,z... >> >>> >> >>>> Where each consecutive prime has the values  >> >>> >> >>>> x=2,y=3,z=5,x=7,y=11,z=13,x=17,y=19,z=23,x=29,y=31 >> >>> >> >>>> z=37 and soon... >> >>> >> >>>> Drawing a line in these coordinates using the primes then >> >>> >> >>>> at the end point prime y = 101 then at that point the >> >>> >> >>>> straight line distance back to the origin of >> >>> >> >>>> (x=0,y=0,z=0) = 93 >> >>> >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>>> Is this correct? >> >>> >> >>>> If not, what is the distance? >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> If I understand correctly, you are taking triplets of consecutive >> >>> >> >>> primes from the sequence of prime numbers. You treat each >> >>> >> >>> triplet as (x,y,z) coordinates of a point and find the triplet's >> >>> >> >>> distance from (0,0,0). Perhaps you have the wrong distance >> >>> >> >>> formula? Using dist((0,0,0),(x,y,z)) = sqrt(x^2+y^2+z^2), >> >>> >> >>> triplet 97 101 103 is about 145.1 units from the origin. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Formula aside, dist((0,0,0),(x,y,z)) is at least as large as >> >>> >> >>> max(x,y,z), so how could (97, 101, 103) possibly be as close >> >>> >> >>> to the origin as 93 units ? >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Among triplets of consecutive primes less than 100000 I don't >> >>> >> >>> find any that are located an integer distance from the origin. >> >>> >> >>> This is considering all triplets [ie, like (2,3,5), (3,5,7), >> >>> >> >>> (5,7,11), etc] rather than just aligned triplets [ie, like >> >>> >> >>> (2,3,5), (7,11,13), (17,19,23), etc]. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>>  >> >>> >> >>> jiw >> >> >> >> James, >> >> >> >> What triangulation distance back to the origin do you get from y = 101? >> >> >> >> My formula may be wrong? >> >> >> >> These are the next coordinates  >> >> >> >> z=103, x=107 , y = 109 , z = 113 ,... >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> >> >> Dan > > Here is the actual plot for the sequential primes starting with (2) > and going to 101 for a total of 26 primes. > > 2 3 5 5 8 8 12 11 15 17 20 22 24 23 25 29 36 > 36 38 35 37 41 48 52 56 53 > > Beginning with (5) the triangulation back to the origin of x=0,y=0,z=0 > Starting @ prime point 5 and continuing 7,11,13.. gives each triangulation > back to the origin. So skipping (2) and (3) because they are trivial we > have  > > (5) = 6.164413928985596.. > (7) = 7.681145668029785.. > (11) = 10.67707824707031.. > (13) = 12.36931705474854.. > (17) = 16.49242210388184.. > (19) = 18.13835716247559.. > (23) = 22.13594436645508.. > (29) = 25.19920539855957.. > (31) = 30.2324333190918.. > (37) = 34.24908828735352.. > (41) = 38.20994567871094.. > (43) = 39.86226272583008.. > (47) = 41.59326934814453.. > (53) = 44.66542434692383.. > (59) = 52.55473327636719.. > (61) = 58.5918083190918.. > (67) = 63.52952194213867.. > (71) = 62.96824645996094.. > (73) = 63.54525756835938.. > (79) = 65.38348388671875.. > (83) = 73.17103576660156.. > (89) = 81.78630828857422.. > (97) = 90.24411010742188.. > (101)= 93 > > Could someone verify or discount these values for > each position on the 3d grid back to the origin? > > If these values are wrong, please give the correct values > of the triangulation for each prime starting with (5) > > TIA > > Dan >
I hadn't heard of his new one but "Cheers Dan" I believe from his writings.
But, Dan, how can (101) be 93 even?

