Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 1403.5739

Remarks on the Egyptian 2/D table in favor of a global approach (D prime number)

Abstract

For h=3 or 4, Egyptian decompositions into h unit fractions, like 2/D = 1/D1 + ... +1/Dh, were given by using (h-1) divisors (di) of D1. This ancient modus operandi, well recognized today, provides Di=DD1/di for i greater than 1. Decompositions selected (depending on di) have generally been studied by modern researchers through the intrinsic features of di itself. An unconventional method is presented here without considering the di properties but just the differences d(h-1)-dh. In contrast to widespread ideas about the last denominator like 'Dh smaller than 1000', it is more appropriate to adopt a global boundary of the form 'Dh smaller or equal to 10D', where 10 comes from the Egyptian decimal system. Singular case 2/53 (with 15 instead of 10) is explained. The number of preliminary alternatives before the final decisions is found tobe so low (71) for h=3 or 4 that a detailed overview is possible. A simple additive method of trials, independent of any context, can be carried out, namely 2n+1= d2+ ... + dh. Clearly the decisions fit with a minimal value of the differences d(h-1)-dh, independently of any di values.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Lionel Bréhamet. 2014-03-23. Remarks on the Egyptian 2/D table in favor of a global approach (D prime number). https://arxiv.org/abs/1403.5739

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Come for the vibe, stay for the math

This article describes our experiences in mathematical outreach over the past decade. We talk about specific activities, but also general principles that we've learned along the way.

math.HO

Graduate Mathematics in the Age of AI: Forming Mathematicians for Original, Independent, and Responsible Inquiry

Artificial intelligence can increasingly produce plausible, sophisticated mathematical material faster than a developing graduate student can understand or verify it. A sophisticated result or paper draft therefore becomes weaker evidence of the student's own mathematical development. This creates a formation gap between output and personal capacity, and a trust gap between a convincing argument and warranted acceptance. The formation gap can persist even when the student understands the output: understanding a supplied argument does not by itself establish the capacity to initiate and direct inquiry. These gaps are not the whole story. AI can also help students explore examples, compare approaches, enter unfamiliar areas, and undertake ambitious research. The task is to design an apprenticeship that realizes these possibilities while developing substantive mathematical command. The central purpose of a mathematics PhD is to form mathematicians capable of original, independent, and responsible inquiry, including inquiry conducted with AI. This document develops that objective through four connected capacities: competence, judgment, independence, and responsibility. It distinguishes a work's contribution to mathematics from the evidence it provides of a student's formation; explains how a known answer can initiate rather than end creative inquiry; and proposes changes in learning activities, assessment, doctoral originality, advising, and institutional support. Purposeful independent work and ambitious AI-assisted research are complementary parts of the model. Its recommendations include proportionate contribution statements, recognition of advising costs, and staged pilots evaluating both mathematical ability and effective human--AI collaboration. The aim is not to preserve an inherited sequence of training, but to improve mathematical formation as mathematical practice changes.

math.HO