Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 50 references

On the Emergence of the Quanta Prime Sequence

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read The paper defines the Quanta Prime sequence $\Omega$ and proves that the quotient $\Omega_0(\lfloor n/2\rfloor|\alpha,\beta|n)/((n-1)(n-2)\cdots(n-\lfloor n/2\rfloor))$ equals the integer $\Psi(\alpha,\beta,n)$, a single identity whose…

desk verdict The central integrality claim in Theorem 25 is false for real parameter points, and the paper's prime-emergence and Riemann-Hypothesis headlines do not survive that fix. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.06796 v1 pith:CBJ5AAGC submitted 2025-01-27 math.GM

Moustafa Ibrahim This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.GM MSC 11A4111B8311N05
keywords QuantaPrimesequenceOmegaPsiMersenneprimesemergenceChebyshevpolynomialsDicksonharmonicnumbers
topics The Collatz ConjectureThe Twin Prime Conjecture
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper is trying to establish that a newly introduced double-indexed integer sequence, the Quanta Prime sequence, is a common engine behind many familiar objects in number theory. Its central identity expresses the earlier $\Psi$-sequence as a quotient of the new $\Omega$-sequence by a falling factorial, and it claims that this quotient is always an integer. If that is right, Mersenne numbers, Fermat numbers, Lucas and Fibonacci-Lucas sequences, Chebyshev polynomials, and Dickson polynomials all become special cases of one construction. The paper further claims a divisibility mechanism in which each prime $p_{k+1}$ divides a value of the Quanta Prime sequence attached to $p_k$, and it states, without proof, a new harmonic-number congruence that it suggests is relevant to the Riemann Hypothesis.

What carries the argument

The central object is the $\Omega$-sequence (Quanta Prime sequence), a double-indexed array defined by the recurrence $$\Omega_r(k|\zeta,\xi|n)=(2\zeta-\xi)(n-r-k)\Omega_r(k-1|\zeta,\xi|n)-2\zeta(n-2r-\delta(n-1))\Omega_{r+1}(k-1|\zeta,\xi|n),$$ with $\Omega_r(0|\zeta,\xi|n)=1$ and $\delta(m)=m\bmod 2$. The argument runs through the earlier $\lambda$-coefficients: the differentiation formula for $\Psi$ produces a recurrence for integers $\lambda_r(k|\alpha,\beta|n)$, and Theorem 23 identifies those coefficients, up to explicit factorials and binomials, with $\Omega_r(k|\alpha,\beta|n)$. Setting $k=\lfloor n/2\rfloor$ then collapses the expansion and isolates the quotient asserted in the Second Fundamental Theorem.

What would settle it

Iterate the recurrence (41) for $n=4$, $(\zeta,\xi)=(1,0)$: formula (76) and the known value $\Psi(1,0,4)=-2$ force $\Omega_0(2|1,0|4)=-12$, so the recurrence must return $-12$; any other value would refute the central identity.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is the Second Fundamental Theorem of the Quanta Prime Sequence (Theorem 25): for any nonzero point $(\alpha,\beta)$ and any natural number $n$, the ratio $\Omega_0(\lfloor n/2\rfloor|\alpha,\beta|n)$ over $(n-1)(n-2)\cdots(n-\lfloor n/2\rfloor)$ equals $\Psi(\alpha,\beta,n)$ and is an integer. From this single identity the author derives new quotient representations for Mersenne numbers, Fermat numbers, Lucas numbers, the Fibonacci-Lucas oscillating sequence, Chebyshev polynomials, and Dickson polynomials, together with the divisibility statement $p_{k+1}\mid \Omega_0(p_k|\alpha,\beta|2p_k)$ for the $k$th prime $p_k$. The paper also presents this as the proof of the previously unproved Theorem 9 from the prior paper [3], recasting Mersenne primality in terms of divisibility of $\Omega$-quotients.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is the differentiation formula for the $\Psi$-polynomials quoted from the author's earlier paper [3] and used without reproof; if that formula is wrong or incomplete, the $\lambda$-recurrence and the whole Quanta Prime identity collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • All of the listed classical families—Mersenne, Fermat, Lucas, Fibonacci-Lucas, Chebyshev, and Dickson—share a single generating mechanism: each is a specialization of the $\Omega$-quotient of Theorem 25, so computations for any one family can be run through the same double-indexed recurrence.
  • The re-proved Theorem 9 gives a new divisibility formulation of Mersenne primality: for a prime $p\ge 5$ with $n=2^{p-1}$, the statement that $2^p-1$ is prime is encoded by whether the quotient at $(-2,-5)$ divides the quotient at $(1,4)$, connecting the construction to the Lucas-Lehmer testing tradition.
  • Theorems 30 and 32 assert that the next prime $p_{k+1}$ always divides the $\Omega_0$ value attached to $p_k$, so the recurrence provides a structured, parameter-flexible way to exhibit each new prime as a divisor of an integer sequence value.
  • Section 19.2.2 states a congruence of the falling factorial with a harmonic number modulo $n^2$ for $n\equiv1\pmod8$; if a proof is supplied, the Quanta Prime sequence would be tied to harmonic numbers and, through known arithmetic equivalences, to the Riemann Hypothesis.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A direct computational extension would be to run recurrence (41) for the first few primes $p_k$ and check the claimed divisibility $p_{k+1}\mid \Omega_0(p_k|\alpha,\beta|2p_k)$ with a fixed convenient point such as $(1,-2)$; the paper gives no numerical table, so this is an immediate way to probe the claim.
  • If the $\Omega$-quotient is truly a universal coefficient array for polynomial families with closed-form $\Psi$-values, then other classical polynomials, for example other orthogonal or permutation families, should admit the same kind of representation; identifying further points $(\alpha,\beta)$ with known $\Psi$ would extend the catalogue presented here.
  • The harmonic congruence, once proved, would sit beside existing arithmetic criteria for the Riemann hypothesis and could be tested numerically for larger $n\equiv1\pmod8$; the paper explicitly defers that development.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a doubly-indexed sequence Ω_r(k|ζ,ξ|n), called the Quanta Prime Sequence, defined by the recurrence in Definition 6.1, and presents two 'fundamental theorems': Theorem 24 expresses the Ψ-polynomials of the author's earlier work as a sum of Ω-terms with claimed integer coefficients, and Theorem 25 represents Ψ(α,β,n) as the ratio Ω_0(⌊n/2⌋|α,β|n) divided by (n−1)(n−2)⋯(n−⌊n/2⌋), asserting that this ratio is an integer. The paper then derives special cases for Mersenne, Lucas, Fermat, Fibonacci–Lucas, Chebyshev, and Dickson sequences, claims that the next prime p_{k+1} divides Ω_0(p_k|α,β|2p_k) for arbitrary (α,β), and states in Section 19.2.2 a congruence involving harmonic numbers that is advertised as hinting at progress on the Riemann Hypothesis.

Significance. If the central identity with the stated integrality held for all real parameters, the Ω-sequence would provide a compact unified representation of many classical sequences and a flexible framework for prime divisibility. The paper is original in its formal setup, and the derivation of the Ω-expansion from the Ψ differential-operator identities is a substantive effort. The special-case evaluations in Sections 12–17 are concrete and checkable. However, the advertised central claims go beyond what is proved: the integrality assertion for real parameters is false, the prime-emergence theorem is ill-posed for non-integer parameters, and the harmonic-number congruence is presented without proof. These are not merely presentation issues.

major comments (4)
  1. [Theorem 25, Eqs. (75)–(76); Theorem 10, Eq. (24)] The assertion that the ratio in Eq. (75) is an integer for every nonzero point (α,β) is false. Take n=3 and (α,β)=(1/2,0). Definition 6.1 gives Ω_0(1|1/2,0|3) = (1)(2) − (1)(3) = −1, while the denominator is 3−1 = 2; the ratio is −1/2. At the same time the recurrence (4) gives Ψ(1/2,0,3) = −1/2, so the equality in (76) holds but the integrality does not. Hence Theorem 25 and the identical claim in Theorem 10 are false as stated, and the 'infinite parameter space' advertised in Section 11 is not valid for real parameters.
  2. [Theorem 24, Eq. (74); Theorem 22, Eq. (52)] The proof of Theorem 22 asserts the existence of integers λ_r(k|α,β|n) divisible by k! without proving it, and the assertion is not true for real parameters. For n=3, k=1, (α,β)=(1/2,0), the coefficient in (74) evaluates to −(1/2)Ω_0(1|1/2,0|3) = 1/2, which is not an integer. Thus the integrality claim in Theorem 24 needs either a proof under extra hypotheses (e.g., integer points) or a restriction of the parameter domain.
  3. [Theorem 32, Eq. (95)] Theorem 32 states p_{k+1} | Ω_0(p_k|α,β|2p_k) for any point (α,β). For a general real point the divisibility statement is not well-formed, since Ω_0 is then a real number and need not be an integer; for instance Section 9 explicitly includes (1,√2) in ω(n), and for n=3 the value Ω_0(1|1,√2|3) = −2−2√2 is not an integer. The proof of Theorem 32 uses Theorem 30, which only covers points in ω(2p_k), and the step from p_{k+1} | Ω_0/Ψ to p_{k+1} | Ω_0 requires Ψ to be an integer; neither condition appears in the theorem statement. The theorem must be reformulated for integer points and reproved with the ω-condition made explicit.
  4. [Section 19.2.2] The new congruence for the harmonic numbers is stated as a result ('we have') but no proof is given, and the auxiliary nonzero integer point (α,β) whose existence is asserted in Section 19.2.1 is neither constructed nor shown to exist. In view of the abstract's claim that this link 'hints at potential progress in understanding the Riemann Hypothesis', this is a headline assertion, not a side remark. It must either be proved or explicitly labeled as a conjecture, and the abstract must be adjusted accordingly.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Theorems 1 and 3] The notation for Ψ is typeset as a two-row array (a b n / α β k), which is difficult to read; a proper function symbol should be introduced and defined.
  2. [Section 8, proof of Theorem 22] The phrase 'a, 2a − b are algebraically independent' is used without explanation; while true, the justification should be given.
  3. [Throughout] Several headings and words contain broken spacing: 'Motiv a tion', 'Quant a Prime', 'P aper', 'F ascina ting P a tterns'. The manuscript needs a careful proofreading pass.
  4. [References] References [1] and [22] are identical, and reference [45] appears incomplete; the bibliography should be cleaned and cross-checked.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

The central Ω/Ψ identity is a genuine derivation, but the paper's Mersenne-primality proof chain reduces at a key point to an unverified self-citation to the author's own [3].

  1. self citation load bearing [Section 17.1, Theorem 47 proof; Section 18, Clarifications on Theorem (9)]
    "This result follows directly from the properties outlined in [3]. For primep ≥ 5, it is shown that the primality of2p − 1 is equivalent to the divisibility condition2n − 1 | Ψ(1, 4, n), with n defined as n := 2p−1."

    The paper's stated objective is to present a comprehensive proof of Theorem (9), which was 'mentioned without proof' in [3]. The proof of Theorem (9) in Section 18 says 'Hence from Theorem (51) and Theorem (25) we get the proof of Theorem (9).' Theorem (51) depends on Theorem (48), whose proof is exactly the quoted Theorem (47), imported from the author's own prior paper [3] and not re-proved here. Thus the Mersenne-primality chain reduces to a self-citation: if Theorem (47) from [3] is incomplete or incorrect, the claimed proof of Theorem (9) collapses. This is load-bearing because the abstract and introduction advertise a proof of Theorem (9) as a key contribution.

full rationale

No fitted-input circularity occurs: the Ω sequence is defined by a recurrence (Definition 6.1) and the identity Ψ(α,β,n) = Ω0(⌊n/2⌋|α,β|n)/((n−1)...) is derived through the λ-coefficient recurrence and a comparison of initial values, not by fitting Ω to Ψ. Theorems 33–42 are genuinely specializations of Theorem (25) to known Ψ values, so they are presentations of known periodic facts rather than circular predictions. The harmonic-number congruence in Section 19.2.2 is asserted without proof, so it is not a circular step; it is an unsupported claim and a correctness risk. Theorem (25)'s integrality clause is also not proved and is false for real parameters, e.g., n=3, (α,β)=(1/2,0) gives ratio −1/2; this is a correctness defect in the prime-emergence argument, not circularity. The main circularity concern is the load-bearing self-citation: the proof of Theorem (9) reduces to Theorem (47), which is quoted from the author's own [3] and not independently established. Because the central Ω identity has independent content within the paper, the score is 4 rather than higher.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central identity rests on the Psi-sequence results from the author's previous papers, which are not re-proved here. Standard theorems (Bertrand, Euclid-Euler, Lagarias) are used as background. The harmonic-number congruence is asserted with no proof and no explicit point (alpha, beta), so it acts as an unproved add-on rather than a derived result.

free parameters (1)
  • No fitted parameters
    The paper does not fit any parameters to data. The variables (alpha, beta) and n are arguments of the sequence, not free parameters tuned to make theorems work.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Theorems 2 through 8 from reference [3] describing the Psi-sequence are accepted without proof in the current paper.
    Theorem 8 (the differential-operator formula for generalized Psi polynomials) is invoked directly in the proof of Theorem 22, and other Psi identities are used throughout. These are not re-derived here.
  • standard math Bertrand-Chebyshev theorem (there is always a prime between n and 2n).
    Used in Theorem 30 to assert that p_{k+1} divides the product p_k(p_k+1)...(2p_k-1). This is a classical theorem, not proved in the paper.
  • standard math Euclid-Euler theorem characterizing even perfect numbers.
    Used in Theorem 49 to connect the Quanta Prime condition to even perfect numbers.
  • ad hoc to paper The existence of a nonzero integer point (alpha, beta) satisfying the congruence in Section 19.2.1 is asserted but not proved or constructed.
    The harmonic-number result hinges on this existential claim, which is never demonstrated. It is effectively an unproved assumption of the paper's final section.
invented entities (1)
  • No new physical or mathematical entities postulating novel forces, particles, or dimensions.
    purpose: The paper introduces a new sequence (Omega) and related spaces (omega(n), Ker omega(n)), but these are constructions within ordinary mathematics rather than invented entities in the sense of novel objects requiring independent evidence.
    The Omega sequence is defined explicitly by a recurrence, so it does not need external falsifiable evidence beyond internal consistency. No new particle or mediator is introduced.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of On the Emergence of the Quanta Prime Sequence." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CBJ5AAGC

@misc{pith2026250206796,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: On the Emergence of the Quanta Prime Sequence},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CBJ5AAGC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.06796}
}
read the original abstract

This paper presents the Quanta Prime Sequence (QPS) and its foundational theorem, showcasing a unique class of polynomials with substantial implications. The study uncovers profound connections between Quanta Prime numbers and essential sequences in number theory and cryptography. The investigation highlights the sequence's contribution to the emergence of new primes and its embodiment of core mathematical constructs, including Mersenne numbers, Fermat numbers, Lucas numbers, Fibonacci numbers, the Chebyshev sequence, and the Dickson sequence. The comprehensive analysis emphasizes the sequence's intrinsic relevance to the Lucas-Lehmer primality test. This research positions the Quanta Prime sequence as a pivotal tool in cryptographic applications, offering novel representations of critical mathematical structures. Additionally, a new result linking the Quanta Prime sequence to the Harmonic series is introduced, hinting at potential progress in understanding the Riemann Hypothesis.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.06796 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The Stable Quanta Prime Sequence at (1, −2) Theorem 19. The Omega sequence associated with n and the point (1, −2) is given by Ωr [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Discrete values of Ψ(1, √ 5, n) for natural values of n. 12.8. The Quanta Prime Sequence Associated with the Point (1, 2). Theorem 40. For any natural number n, the Quanta Prime Sequence satisfies: Ω0 n 2  | 1, 2 | n  (n − 1)(n − 2)· · · n −  n 2  = (−1)⌊ n 2 ⌋ · 2 δ(n−1) · n δ(n) . (112) Proof. From equation (12), we have: Ψ(1, 2, n) = n n −  n 2   n −  n 2   n 2   · (−1)⌊ n 2 ⌋ . After simplification… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 50 canonical work pages

  1. [3]

    Moustafa Ibrahim,Generalizing the Eight Levels Theorem: A Journey to Mersenne Prime Discoveries and New Polynomial Classes, Arab Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 31:1, 32–52, DOI: 10.1080/25765299.2023.2288718, (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  2. [1]

    Broughan,Equivalents of the Riemann Hypothesis, Cambridge University Press, 3 vol- umes, (January 31, 2018); Vol

    K. Broughan,Equivalents of the Riemann Hypothesis, Cambridge University Press, 3 vol- umes, (January 31, 2018); Vol. 1: Arithmetic Equivalents, 400 pages; Vol. 2: Analytic Equivalents, 350 pages; Vol. 3:Further Steps towards Resolving the Riemann Hypothesis, 704 pages, (September 30, 2023)

    work page 2018

  3. [4]

    Leonard Eugene Dickson, History of the Theory of Numbers, Volume II: Diophantine Analysis, (2005)

    work page 2005

  4. [5]

    N. J. A. Sloane et al.,The On-Line Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences, Available athttps: //oeis.org (2019)

    work page 2019

  5. [6]

    Benjamin Fine, Anja Moldenhauer, Gerhard Rosenberger, Annika Schürenberg, and Leonard Wienke,Algebra and Number Theory: A Selection of Highlights, Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter, DOI: 10.1515/9783110790283, (2023)

    work page doi:10.1515/9783110790283 2023

  6. [7]

    Paula Catarino, Helena Campos, and Paula Vasco,On the Mersenne Sequence, Annales Mathematicae et Informaticae, 46, 37–53, (2016)

    work page 2016

  7. [8]

    Elena Deza, Mersenne Numbers and Fermat Numbers, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd, (2021)

    work page 2021

  8. [9]

    J., 17, (1970)

    Michael Fried,On a Conjecture of Schur, Michigan Math. J., 17, (1970)

    work page 1970

Show all 50 references
  1. [10]

    Hermite,Sur les fonctions de sept lettres, C

    C. Hermite,Sur les fonctions de sept lettres, C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, 57, (1863)

  2. [11]

    of Math., 11, (1896)

    L.E.Dickson, The Analytic Representation of Substitutions on a Power of a Prime Number of Letters with a Discussion of the Linear Group, Ann. of Math., 11, (1896)

  3. [12]

    R. Lidl, G. L. Mullen, and G. Turnwald,Dickson Polynomials, Pitman Monographs in Pure and Applied Mathematics, Vol. 65, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, (1993)

    1993

  4. [13]

    Charpin and G

    P. Charpin and G. Gong,Hyperbent Functions, Kloosterman Sums, and Dickson Polyno- mials, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, Vol. 54, No. 9, (2008)

    2008

  5. [14]

    Schumayer and D

    D. Schumayer and D. A. W. Hutchinson, Colloquium: Physics of the Riemann Hy- pothesis, Rev. Mod. Phys., 83(2), 307–330. DOI:https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ RevModPhys.83.307, Apr (2011). ON THE EMERGENCE OF THE QUANTA PRIME SEQUENCE 33

    2011

  6. [15]

    J. F. Dillon,Geometry, Codes, and Difference Sets: Exceptional Connections, in Codes and Designs (Columbus, OH, 2000), vol. 10, Ohio State Univ. Math. Res. Inst. Publ., de Gruyter, Berlin, (2002)

    2002

  7. [16]

    J. F. Dillon and H. Dobbertin,New Cyclic Difference Sets with Singer Parameters, Finite Fields and Their Applications, vol. 10, no. 3, (2004)

    2004

  8. [17]

    X. Hou, G. L. Mullen, J. A. Sellers, and J. L. Yucas,Reversed Dickson Polynomials over Finite Fields, Finite Fields Appl., 15, (2009)

    2009

  9. [18]

    Mesnager, Bent and Hyper-bent Functions in Polynomial Form and Their Link with Some Exponential Sums and Dickson Polynomials, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, Vol

    S. Mesnager, Bent and Hyper-bent Functions in Polynomial Form and Their Link with Some Exponential Sums and Dickson Polynomials, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, Vol. 57, No. 9, (2011)

    2011

  10. [19]

    Mesnager, Semi-bent Functions from Dillon and Niho Exponents, Kloosterman Sums and Dickson Polynomials, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, Vol

    S. Mesnager, Semi-bent Functions from Dillon and Niho Exponents, Kloosterman Sums and Dickson Polynomials, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, Vol. 57, No. 11, (2011)

    2011

  11. [20]

    G. Wu, N. Li, T. Helleseth, and Y. Zhang,Some Classes of Monomial Complete Per- mutation Polynomials over Finite Fields of Characteristic Two, Finite Fields and Their Applications, Volume 28, (2014)

    2014

  12. [21]

    J. C. Lagarias,An Elementary Problem Equivalent to the Riemann Hypothesis, The Amer- ican Mathematical Monthly, 109(6), 534–543, (2002)

    2002

  13. [22]

    Broughan,Equivalents of the Riemann Hypothesis, Cambridge University Press, 3 vol- umes, (January 31, 2018); Vol

    K. Broughan,Equivalents of the Riemann Hypothesis, Cambridge University Press, 3 vol- umes, (January 31, 2018); Vol. 1: Arithmetic Equivalents, 400 pages; Vol. 2: Analytic Equivalents, 350 pages; Vol. 3:Further Steps Towards Resolving the Riemann Hypothesis, 704 pages, (Septem...

    2018

  14. [23]

    Levine and J

    J. Levine and J. V. Brawley,Some Cryptographic Applications of Permutation Polynomi- als, Cryptologia, 1, (1977)

    1977

  15. [24]

    P. L. Chebyshev,Théorie des Mécanismes Connus sous le Nom de Parallélogrammes, St. Petersbourg, (1854)

  16. [25]

    Ishii, Periodicity of Chebyshev Polynomials over the Residue Ring ofZ/2rZ and an Electronic Signature, Trans

    M. Ishii, Periodicity of Chebyshev Polynomials over the Residue Ring ofZ/2rZ and an Electronic Signature, Trans. Japan Soc. Industrial Appl. Math., vol. 18, no. 2, (2008)

    2008

  17. [26]

    Ishii and A

    M. Ishii and A. Yoshimoto,Applications for Cryptography of the Structure of the Group of Reduced Residue Classes of Residue Ring ofZ/2wZ, Trans. Japan Soc. Industrial Appl. Math., vol. 19, no. 1, (2009)

    2009

  18. [27]

    X. Liao, F. Chen, and K. Wong, On the Security of Public-Key Algorithms Based on Chebyshev Polynomials over the Finite FieldZN, IEEE Trans. Computers, vol. 59, no. 10, (2010)

    2010

  19. [28]

    Iwasaki and K

    A. Iwasaki and K. Umeno,Periodical Property of Chebyshev Polynomials on the Residue Class Rings Modulo2w, IEICE Tech. Rep., CAS2014-67k, NLP2014-61, (2014)

    2014

  20. [29]

    J. C. Mason and D. C. Handscomb,Chebyshev Polynomials, Chapman-Hall, CRC, (2002)

    2002

  21. [30]

    Yoshioka and Y

    D. Yoshioka and Y. Dainobu,On Some Properties of Chebyshev Polynomial Sequences Modulo 2k, IEICE Nonlinear Theory Appl., vol. 6, no. 3, (2015)

    2015

  22. [31]

    T. S. Chihara,An Introduction to Orthogonal Polynomials, Gordon-Breach Science Pub- lisher, New York, (1978)

    1978

  23. [32]

    G. A. Chisnall,A Modified Chebyshev-Everett Interpolation Formula, Math. Tables Other Aids Comput., 10(54), (1956)

    1956

  24. [33]

    Madelung,Halbleiter in Handbuch der Physik, edited by S

    O. Madelung,Halbleiter in Handbuch der Physik, edited by S. Fligge, Vol. XX, Springer, Berlin, (1957)

    1957

  25. [34]

    Werner and G

    H. Werner and G. Raymann,An Approximation to the Fermi Integral F1/2(x), Math. Comput., 17(82), (1963). 34 MOUSTAF A IBRAHIM

    1963

  26. [35]

    N. L. Mathakari,A Few Nobel Prizes in Physics: How Physicists Have Contributed to Technology, Current Science, 91(5), (2006)

    2006

  27. [36]

    B. J. Bernstein,Four Physicists and the Bomb: The Early Years, 1945–1950, Hist. Stud. Phys. Biol. Sci., 18(2), (1988)

    1988

  28. [37]

    Cooper, Enrico Fermi: And the Revolutions in Modern Physics, Oxford University Press, (1999)

    D. Cooper, Enrico Fermi: And the Revolutions in Modern Physics, Oxford University Press, (1999)

    1999

  29. [38]

    Paszkowski,Evaluation of Fermi-Dirac Integral, in Nonlinear Numerical Methods and Rational Approximation (Wilrijk, 1987), A

    S. Paszkowski,Evaluation of Fermi-Dirac Integral, in Nonlinear Numerical Methods and Rational Approximation (Wilrijk, 1987), A. Cuyt (Ed.), Math. Appl., Vol. 43, (1988)

    1988

  30. [39]

    Paszkowski,Evaluation of the Fermi-Dirac Integral of Half-Integer Order, Zastos

    S. Paszkowski,Evaluation of the Fermi-Dirac Integral of Half-Integer Order, Zastos. Mat., 21(2), (1991)

    1991

  31. [40]

    Pichon,Numerical Calculation of the Generalized Fermi-Dirac Integrals, Comput

    B. Pichon,Numerical Calculation of the Generalized Fermi-Dirac Integrals, Comput. Phys. Comm., 55(2), (1989)

    1989

  32. [41]

    Piessens and M

    R. Piessens and M. Branders, Chebyshev Polynomial Expansions of the Riemann Zeta Function, Math. Comput., 26(120), (1972)

    1972

  33. [42]

    W. J. Cody, K. E. Hillstrom, and H. C. Thacher,Chebyshev Approximations for Riemann Zeta Function, Math. Comput., 25, (1971)

    1971

  34. [43]

    Redmond,Number Theory, An Introduction, Marcel Dekker, (1996)

    D. Redmond,Number Theory, An Introduction, Marcel Dekker, (1996)

    1996

  35. [44]

    G. H. Hardy and E. M. Wright,An Introduction to the Theory of Numbers, 6th ed., Oxford University Press, (2008)

    2008

  36. [45]

    J. R. Oppenheim, The Sieve of Eratosthenes: A Primer, Math. Mag., 92(5), 338–348, (2019)

    2019

  37. [46]

    J. B. Rosser and L. Schoenfeld,Sharpening the Bound for the Number of Primes Less Than a Given Magnitude, Amer. Math. Monthly, 45(1), 22–25, (1938)

    1938

  38. [47]

    P. L. Chebyshev,Mémoire sur les nombres premiers, J. Math. Pures Appl., 17, 366–390, (1852)

  39. [48]

    T. M. Apostol,Introduction to Analytic Number Theory, Springer-Verlag, (1976)

    1976

  40. [49]

    M. B. Nathanson,Elementary Methods in Number Theory, Graduate Texts in Mathemat- ics, Springer, (2000)

    2000

  41. [50]

    Tóth, On Prime Gaps and Their Distribution, Amer

    L. Tóth, On Prime Gaps and Their Distribution, Amer. Math. Monthly, 126(1), 28–38, (2019)

    2019

  42. [51]

    Available at https://www

    Mersenne Research, Latest Mersenne Prime Discovery . Available at https://www. mersenne.org/, accessed October (2024). Department of Mathematics, F aculty of Science, University of Bahrain, Kingdom of Bahrain Email address: mimohamed@uob.edu.bh

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.