Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

## Re: [PrimeNumbers] LA UNIDAD NO ES PRI MO

Expand Messages
• ... Dr. Casaubon, I hope you see that your definition as you state it doesn t clarify things. Of which primes is 1 the product? Either your statement of the
Message 1 of 2 , Feb 9, 2012
On 02/07/2012 01:24 PM, Juan Ignacio Casaubon wrote:
> La unidad no es primo porque tiene dos divisores en vez de cuatro;
> ademas, si lo fuera, seria invalido EL TEOREMA FUNAMENTAL DE LA
> ARITMÃ‰TICA: Todo nÃºmero es producto UNICO DE PRIMOS

Dr. Casaubon,

I hope you see that your definition as you state it doesn't clarify
things. Of which primes is 1 the product? Either your statement of the
fundamental theorem of arithmetic is broken, or your definition of
primes is broken. Either one needs exceptions to work. Either the
exceptions have to be made in the "fundamental theorem" or in your
definition of "prime." (And maybe your definition of "number". I
wonder about 0 and 1.5 and 2+3i.)

--
Alan Eliasen
eliasen@...
http://futureboy.us/
Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.