Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

The most accurate equation for Pi(N)

Expand Messages
  • prime_bo@yahoo.com
    Is there a accurate way of calculating Pi(N)? I have heard of X/(LN(X)), but it is not entirely accurate. Is there a more precise equation or method other than
    Message 1 of 5 , Mar 6, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Is there a accurate way of calculating Pi(N)? I have heard of
      X/(LN(X)), but it is not entirely accurate. Is there a more precise
      equation or method other than counting? Is it possible, has it been
      done already? What is the current standing or theory? I would
      appreciate any insite or information.
    • Jud McCranie
      ... There are several formulas that are more accurate, for instance ones by Riemann, Legendre, and Tchebecev (sp?) I think. x/(ln(x)-1) is more accurate, and
      Message 2 of 5 , Mar 6, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        At 01:00 AM 3/7/2001 +0000, prime_bo@... wrote:
        >Is there a accurate way of calculating Pi(N)? I have heard of
        >X/(LN(X)), but it is not entirely accurate. Is there a more precise
        >equation or method other than counting? Is it possible, has it been
        >done already? What is the current standing or theory? I would
        >appreciate any insite or information.

        There are several formulas that are more accurate, for instance ones by
        Riemann, Legendre, and Tchebecev (sp?) I think. x/(ln(x)-1) is more
        accurate, and x/ln(x)*(1+1/ln(x)) is more accurate. Riemann's method is
        accurate to about sqrt(x), but it is a little more involved.

        +--------------------------------------------------------+
        | Jud McCranie |
        | |
        | 137*2^261147+1 is prime! (78,616 digits, 5/2/00) |
        +--------------------------------------------------------+
      • Jud McCranie
        ... That gives an exact count, but it takes a lot of computation. +--------------------------------------------------------+ ...
        Message 3 of 5 , Mar 6, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          At 12:35 PM 3/7/2001 +0900, S.Tomabechi wrote:
          >Do you mean Pi(N) = #{ prime numbers < N } ?
          >If it is so, there is an accurate method so called Meissel-Lehmer method.

          That gives an exact count, but it takes a lot of computation.


          +--------------------------------------------------------+
          | Jud McCranie |
          | |
          | 137*2^261147+1 is prime! (78,616 digits, 5/2/00) |
          +--------------------------------------------------------+
        • S.Tomabechi
          Do you mean Pi(N) = #{ prime numbers
          Message 4 of 5 , Mar 6, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            Do you mean Pi(N) = #{ prime numbers < N } ?
            If it is so, there is an accurate method so called Meissel-Lehmer method.
            I heard that calucation was done for N <10^17 several years ago.
            You can find the topics about Pi(N) at Hans Riesel's book
            Prime Numbers and Computer Methods for Factorization
            (Progress in Mathematics, Vol 126) Birkhaeuser

            Satoshi Tomabechi

            On Wed, 07 Mar 2001 01:00:16 -0000
            prime_bo@... wrote:
            > Is there a accurate way of calculating Pi(N)? I have heard of
            > X/(LN(X)), but it is not entirely accurate. Is there a more precise
            > equation or method other than counting? Is it possible, has it been
            > done already? What is the current standing or theory? I would
            > appreciate any insite or information.
            >
            >
          • Phil Carmody
            ... Mathematica s Implementation Notes:
            Message 5 of 5 , Mar 6, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              On Tue, 06 March 2001, Jud McCranie wrote:
              > At 12:35 PM 3/7/2001 +0900, S.Tomabechi wrote:
              > >Do you mean Pi(N) = #{ prime numbers < N } ?
              > >If it is so, there is an accurate method so called Meissel-Lehmer method.
              >
              > That gives an exact count, but it takes a lot of computation.

              Mathematica's Implementation Notes:
              <<<
              Prime and PrimePi use sparse caching and sieving. For large , the Lagarias�Miller�Odlyzko algorithm for PrimePi is used, based on asymptotic estimates of the density of primes, and is inverted to give Prime.
              >>>

              I think that this algorithm is closer to the state of the art presently than the one you mention. However, it appears that everyone's joined the party, and the ultimate algorithm is a hotch-potch from about 7 contributors (including all of the above). We're all behind the times guys, look at this page:

              http://numbers.computation.free.fr/Constants/Primes/countingPrimes.html


              Jaw drops...


              Phil

              Mathematics should not have to involve martyrdom;
              Support Eric Weisstein, see http://mathworld.wolfram.com
              Find the best deals on the web at AltaVista Shopping!
              http://www.shopping.altavista.com
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.