Is prime factorization better?











up vote
6
down vote

favorite












From the point of view of a grade $4$ student - why and how is prime factorization of a number better in some sense (if at all)?



Visually, why is representing $30$ in the form of $2 times 3 times 5$, like this



2 x 3 x 5



(Source: mathlesstraveled.com)



might be better than say in the form $5 times 6$ like this?



5 x 6 grid



If it is not, then why would we need it?



I know the fact that they are the building blocks of every number, but how could we make the kids appreciate this fact?



I'm also familiar with some 'contrived' problems which force prime-factorization, and with the application of primes to the field of cryptography. But the latter might not make much sense at the middle school level.



Edit: middle school = grade 4-7 = ages 8-12 = generally when prime factorization would be introduced.










share|cite|improve this question
























  • And representing numbers in the way you showed does make sense? I have to admit that it wouldn't help me much.
    – Professor Vector
    Jun 7 '17 at 8:25










  • That doesn't help me either. I was only mapping 2 x 3 x 5 and 5 x 6 to visual models. A lot of books have visual models for numbers.
    – yomayne
    Jun 7 '17 at 8:31










  • You can tie it to the GCD, so simplifying fractions, ratios, making graphics representing ratios out of fewer parts….
    – Ry-
    Jun 7 '17 at 8:35










  • frankly, the pentagon and 5 triangles are distractful... could be constructed other more vivid figures to demonstrate the prime factorization...
    – farruhota
    Jun 7 '17 at 8:43















up vote
6
down vote

favorite












From the point of view of a grade $4$ student - why and how is prime factorization of a number better in some sense (if at all)?



Visually, why is representing $30$ in the form of $2 times 3 times 5$, like this



2 x 3 x 5



(Source: mathlesstraveled.com)



might be better than say in the form $5 times 6$ like this?



5 x 6 grid



If it is not, then why would we need it?



I know the fact that they are the building blocks of every number, but how could we make the kids appreciate this fact?



I'm also familiar with some 'contrived' problems which force prime-factorization, and with the application of primes to the field of cryptography. But the latter might not make much sense at the middle school level.



Edit: middle school = grade 4-7 = ages 8-12 = generally when prime factorization would be introduced.










share|cite|improve this question
























  • And representing numbers in the way you showed does make sense? I have to admit that it wouldn't help me much.
    – Professor Vector
    Jun 7 '17 at 8:25










  • That doesn't help me either. I was only mapping 2 x 3 x 5 and 5 x 6 to visual models. A lot of books have visual models for numbers.
    – yomayne
    Jun 7 '17 at 8:31










  • You can tie it to the GCD, so simplifying fractions, ratios, making graphics representing ratios out of fewer parts….
    – Ry-
    Jun 7 '17 at 8:35










  • frankly, the pentagon and 5 triangles are distractful... could be constructed other more vivid figures to demonstrate the prime factorization...
    – farruhota
    Jun 7 '17 at 8:43













up vote
6
down vote

favorite









up vote
6
down vote

favorite











From the point of view of a grade $4$ student - why and how is prime factorization of a number better in some sense (if at all)?



Visually, why is representing $30$ in the form of $2 times 3 times 5$, like this



2 x 3 x 5



(Source: mathlesstraveled.com)



might be better than say in the form $5 times 6$ like this?



5 x 6 grid



If it is not, then why would we need it?



I know the fact that they are the building blocks of every number, but how could we make the kids appreciate this fact?



I'm also familiar with some 'contrived' problems which force prime-factorization, and with the application of primes to the field of cryptography. But the latter might not make much sense at the middle school level.



Edit: middle school = grade 4-7 = ages 8-12 = generally when prime factorization would be introduced.










share|cite|improve this question















From the point of view of a grade $4$ student - why and how is prime factorization of a number better in some sense (if at all)?



Visually, why is representing $30$ in the form of $2 times 3 times 5$, like this



2 x 3 x 5



(Source: mathlesstraveled.com)



might be better than say in the form $5 times 6$ like this?



5 x 6 grid



If it is not, then why would we need it?



I know the fact that they are the building blocks of every number, but how could we make the kids appreciate this fact?



I'm also familiar with some 'contrived' problems which force prime-factorization, and with the application of primes to the field of cryptography. But the latter might not make much sense at the middle school level.



Edit: middle school = grade 4-7 = ages 8-12 = generally when prime factorization would be introduced.







number-theory elementary-number-theory prime-numbers prime-factorization






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Jun 8 '17 at 5:01

























asked Jun 7 '17 at 8:19









yomayne

117111




117111












  • And representing numbers in the way you showed does make sense? I have to admit that it wouldn't help me much.
    – Professor Vector
    Jun 7 '17 at 8:25










  • That doesn't help me either. I was only mapping 2 x 3 x 5 and 5 x 6 to visual models. A lot of books have visual models for numbers.
    – yomayne
    Jun 7 '17 at 8:31










  • You can tie it to the GCD, so simplifying fractions, ratios, making graphics representing ratios out of fewer parts….
    – Ry-
    Jun 7 '17 at 8:35










  • frankly, the pentagon and 5 triangles are distractful... could be constructed other more vivid figures to demonstrate the prime factorization...
    – farruhota
    Jun 7 '17 at 8:43


















  • And representing numbers in the way you showed does make sense? I have to admit that it wouldn't help me much.
    – Professor Vector
    Jun 7 '17 at 8:25










  • That doesn't help me either. I was only mapping 2 x 3 x 5 and 5 x 6 to visual models. A lot of books have visual models for numbers.
    – yomayne
    Jun 7 '17 at 8:31










  • You can tie it to the GCD, so simplifying fractions, ratios, making graphics representing ratios out of fewer parts….
    – Ry-
    Jun 7 '17 at 8:35










  • frankly, the pentagon and 5 triangles are distractful... could be constructed other more vivid figures to demonstrate the prime factorization...
    – farruhota
    Jun 7 '17 at 8:43
















And representing numbers in the way you showed does make sense? I have to admit that it wouldn't help me much.
– Professor Vector
Jun 7 '17 at 8:25




And representing numbers in the way you showed does make sense? I have to admit that it wouldn't help me much.
– Professor Vector
Jun 7 '17 at 8:25












That doesn't help me either. I was only mapping 2 x 3 x 5 and 5 x 6 to visual models. A lot of books have visual models for numbers.
– yomayne
Jun 7 '17 at 8:31




That doesn't help me either. I was only mapping 2 x 3 x 5 and 5 x 6 to visual models. A lot of books have visual models for numbers.
– yomayne
Jun 7 '17 at 8:31












You can tie it to the GCD, so simplifying fractions, ratios, making graphics representing ratios out of fewer parts….
– Ry-
Jun 7 '17 at 8:35




You can tie it to the GCD, so simplifying fractions, ratios, making graphics representing ratios out of fewer parts….
– Ry-
Jun 7 '17 at 8:35












frankly, the pentagon and 5 triangles are distractful... could be constructed other more vivid figures to demonstrate the prime factorization...
– farruhota
Jun 7 '17 at 8:43




frankly, the pentagon and 5 triangles are distractful... could be constructed other more vivid figures to demonstrate the prime factorization...
– farruhota
Jun 7 '17 at 8:43










8 Answers
8






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
5
down vote













I wouldn't say it's better. It's different and allows a different set of thought to emerge in the spectator's mind. If the real question underlying this is something like: Why should we teach prime factorisation, I have two answers (and others probably have more):




  1. It's unique, allowing us to avoid discussions about whether $2times 15$ or $3times 10$ is the better factorisation of $30$.


  2. It can be useful to think in terms of prime factors when doing other things, like calculating least common multiple/greatest common divisor (those should be understandable at the level you talk about, but coming from a different school system than you, your "middle school level" means absolutely nothing to me, please don't use references like that on international sites).







share|cite|improve this answer




























    up vote
    2
    down vote













    This isn't exactly addressing your question, but I would suggest that the factorization $30 = 2 times 3times 5$ is better represented as a 3-dimensional stack of boxes like this:



    stack of boxes in 3 dimensions



    (but with the correct numbers in each direction), rather than as polyogon-like shapes.



    I think this visualization may help with understanding how prime factorizations give a more "efficient" and "neat" way of understanding the number $30$ compared to other factorizations (in a vague non-technical sense).






    share|cite|improve this answer



















    • 1




      this works only for three prime factors at the most
      – yomayne
      Jun 13 '17 at 6:51






    • 1




      yes, I agree that visualizing things in 4 dimensions or higher is no longer "intuitive", which is an unfortunate limitation. but I would still suggest it is the "correct" way to think about factoring and there are ways of practicing this skill, for example as described here
      – Harry Richman
      Jun 15 '17 at 0:23


















    up vote
    1
    down vote













    It is not better in general. However, for various number-theoretical questions one needs the prime factorization, rather than another one. For example, the Fermat problem, asking which integers $nge 1$ are the sum of two squares, needs the prime factorization. We see that $n=30$ is not the sum of two squares, because in the prime factorization, not all factors $qequiv 3bmod 4$ occur with an even exponent. Indeed, $3$ appears with an odd exponent $1$.






    share|cite|improve this answer




























      up vote
      1
      down vote













      I might explain to kids that you need it to find out if the two numbers are co-prime or not.



      One application of co-prime (which kids might understand) is to make the gears life longer. If the number of teeth is co-prime between the meshing gears, the gears will wear evenly. Therefore, mechanical engineers try to design the number of teeth of the gear system in co-prime.






      share|cite|improve this answer




























        up vote
        1
        down vote













        Graphical representations of algebraic relations are sometimes more enlightning than the algebraic formula itself (see only the online catalogues of funny function-curves, of fractals or many others), so I think there is no general rule that this or that representation of numbers is more "intuitive" or "nicer"...



        Example: if you would consequently work with numbers in terms of their primefactorizations, then any multiplicative problem is extremely easy - but any additive problem is extremely difficult: if $z=p_1^{e_1}p_2^{e_2}$ then first the derivation and then the final expression of $z+1$ in that notational scheme is extremely difficult!



        We have for cultural reasons the preference for the positional decimal-digit-system which makes addition extremely simple - and multiplication a complicated operation needing computations of each single digit with each other and which also needs observing carries and what not.



        For the graphical representation of functions of numbers there is, if I recall the name correctly, for instance the "Moser-representation" which give hyperoperations (in the sense of a family/sequence of binary operations "+","*","^",...) a graphical representation and which arrives at a very concise notation-scheme for extremely huge numbers (see wikipedia)






        Besides of that, I like (to contrast many comments here) the first given representation much - as a nice geometrical and easily memorizable pattern. Don't know, whether an extension would lead to something remarkable insight or algorithmic pattern, but that what I see, pleases me much.

        P.s.: note that the given graphic in your question is not consistent: the pentagon should be rotated such that its sides are neighbored to the triangles and not the edges as it is shown there, compare to this corrected image:



        $ qquad qquad $ picture






        share|cite|improve this answer






























          up vote
          0
          down vote













          I don't understand the top picture at all, so I wouldn't say that's simpler, because it clearly isn't.



          I would say that a prime factorization is better in some sense because it's easiest to deal with something once you've broken it into the simplest possible pieces. This is a general principle really: If you have a complex problem to tackle, try to break the problem in tiny pieces and deal with those.






          share|cite|improve this answer





















          • [two dots, replicated thrice] replicated five times. I picked it directly from the source. I'm not sure if the pentagon is helping in any way
            – yomayne
            Jun 8 '17 at 5:00










          • This answer the OP's question in the first line: "[W]hy and how is prime factorization of a number better in some sense (if at all)?" Tell me in what way does my answer not address his question?
            – JavaMan
            Jun 8 '17 at 18:43


















          up vote
          0
          down vote













          If you display your brick like pictures for $2times 15$, $3times 10$ and $6times 5$, you introduce the inverse function $y=frac{30}x$ as a bonus and state that all rectangles drawn under share the same area...






          share|cite|improve this answer




























            up vote
            0
            down vote













            A prime factorization of a number $n$ is certainly useful if you are interested in all the ways of arranging $n$ units into a rectangular array.



            The units could be square meters.



            The units could be discrete 'dots', or people.



            Say you have $30$ students in a class. You can arrange the classroom desks in a $6 times 5$ rectangular pattern. You train the students to leave the classroom in a $1 times 30$ pattern. If you are leading them out of the classroom, you train them to form a $2 times 15$ formation. In the school auditorium, the students are trained to sit in a designated $10 times 3$ section.






            share|cite|improve this answer





















              Your Answer





              StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
              return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
              StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
              StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
              });
              });
              }, "mathjax-editing");

              StackExchange.ready(function() {
              var channelOptions = {
              tags: "".split(" "),
              id: "69"
              };
              initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

              StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
              // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
              if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
              StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
              createEditor();
              });
              }
              else {
              createEditor();
              }
              });

              function createEditor() {
              StackExchange.prepareEditor({
              heartbeatType: 'answer',
              convertImagesToLinks: true,
              noModals: true,
              showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
              reputationToPostImages: 10,
              bindNavPrevention: true,
              postfix: "",
              imageUploader: {
              brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
              contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
              allowUrls: true
              },
              noCode: true, onDemand: true,
              discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
              ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
              });


              }
              });














               

              draft saved


              draft discarded


















              StackExchange.ready(
              function () {
              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2313203%2fis-prime-factorization-better%23new-answer', 'question_page');
              }
              );

              Post as a guest















              Required, but never shown

























              8 Answers
              8






              active

              oldest

              votes








              8 Answers
              8






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes








              up vote
              5
              down vote













              I wouldn't say it's better. It's different and allows a different set of thought to emerge in the spectator's mind. If the real question underlying this is something like: Why should we teach prime factorisation, I have two answers (and others probably have more):




              1. It's unique, allowing us to avoid discussions about whether $2times 15$ or $3times 10$ is the better factorisation of $30$.


              2. It can be useful to think in terms of prime factors when doing other things, like calculating least common multiple/greatest common divisor (those should be understandable at the level you talk about, but coming from a different school system than you, your "middle school level" means absolutely nothing to me, please don't use references like that on international sites).







              share|cite|improve this answer

























                up vote
                5
                down vote













                I wouldn't say it's better. It's different and allows a different set of thought to emerge in the spectator's mind. If the real question underlying this is something like: Why should we teach prime factorisation, I have two answers (and others probably have more):




                1. It's unique, allowing us to avoid discussions about whether $2times 15$ or $3times 10$ is the better factorisation of $30$.


                2. It can be useful to think in terms of prime factors when doing other things, like calculating least common multiple/greatest common divisor (those should be understandable at the level you talk about, but coming from a different school system than you, your "middle school level" means absolutely nothing to me, please don't use references like that on international sites).







                share|cite|improve this answer























                  up vote
                  5
                  down vote










                  up vote
                  5
                  down vote









                  I wouldn't say it's better. It's different and allows a different set of thought to emerge in the spectator's mind. If the real question underlying this is something like: Why should we teach prime factorisation, I have two answers (and others probably have more):




                  1. It's unique, allowing us to avoid discussions about whether $2times 15$ or $3times 10$ is the better factorisation of $30$.


                  2. It can be useful to think in terms of prime factors when doing other things, like calculating least common multiple/greatest common divisor (those should be understandable at the level you talk about, but coming from a different school system than you, your "middle school level" means absolutely nothing to me, please don't use references like that on international sites).







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  I wouldn't say it's better. It's different and allows a different set of thought to emerge in the spectator's mind. If the real question underlying this is something like: Why should we teach prime factorisation, I have two answers (and others probably have more):




                  1. It's unique, allowing us to avoid discussions about whether $2times 15$ or $3times 10$ is the better factorisation of $30$.


                  2. It can be useful to think in terms of prime factors when doing other things, like calculating least common multiple/greatest common divisor (those should be understandable at the level you talk about, but coming from a different school system than you, your "middle school level" means absolutely nothing to me, please don't use references like that on international sites).








                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Jun 7 '17 at 8:35









                  Henrik

                  5,93182030




                  5,93182030






















                      up vote
                      2
                      down vote













                      This isn't exactly addressing your question, but I would suggest that the factorization $30 = 2 times 3times 5$ is better represented as a 3-dimensional stack of boxes like this:



                      stack of boxes in 3 dimensions



                      (but with the correct numbers in each direction), rather than as polyogon-like shapes.



                      I think this visualization may help with understanding how prime factorizations give a more "efficient" and "neat" way of understanding the number $30$ compared to other factorizations (in a vague non-technical sense).






                      share|cite|improve this answer



















                      • 1




                        this works only for three prime factors at the most
                        – yomayne
                        Jun 13 '17 at 6:51






                      • 1




                        yes, I agree that visualizing things in 4 dimensions or higher is no longer "intuitive", which is an unfortunate limitation. but I would still suggest it is the "correct" way to think about factoring and there are ways of practicing this skill, for example as described here
                        – Harry Richman
                        Jun 15 '17 at 0:23















                      up vote
                      2
                      down vote













                      This isn't exactly addressing your question, but I would suggest that the factorization $30 = 2 times 3times 5$ is better represented as a 3-dimensional stack of boxes like this:



                      stack of boxes in 3 dimensions



                      (but with the correct numbers in each direction), rather than as polyogon-like shapes.



                      I think this visualization may help with understanding how prime factorizations give a more "efficient" and "neat" way of understanding the number $30$ compared to other factorizations (in a vague non-technical sense).






                      share|cite|improve this answer



















                      • 1




                        this works only for three prime factors at the most
                        – yomayne
                        Jun 13 '17 at 6:51






                      • 1




                        yes, I agree that visualizing things in 4 dimensions or higher is no longer "intuitive", which is an unfortunate limitation. but I would still suggest it is the "correct" way to think about factoring and there are ways of practicing this skill, for example as described here
                        – Harry Richman
                        Jun 15 '17 at 0:23













                      up vote
                      2
                      down vote










                      up vote
                      2
                      down vote









                      This isn't exactly addressing your question, but I would suggest that the factorization $30 = 2 times 3times 5$ is better represented as a 3-dimensional stack of boxes like this:



                      stack of boxes in 3 dimensions



                      (but with the correct numbers in each direction), rather than as polyogon-like shapes.



                      I think this visualization may help with understanding how prime factorizations give a more "efficient" and "neat" way of understanding the number $30$ compared to other factorizations (in a vague non-technical sense).






                      share|cite|improve this answer














                      This isn't exactly addressing your question, but I would suggest that the factorization $30 = 2 times 3times 5$ is better represented as a 3-dimensional stack of boxes like this:



                      stack of boxes in 3 dimensions



                      (but with the correct numbers in each direction), rather than as polyogon-like shapes.



                      I think this visualization may help with understanding how prime factorizations give a more "efficient" and "neat" way of understanding the number $30$ compared to other factorizations (in a vague non-technical sense).







                      share|cite|improve this answer














                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer








                      edited Jun 8 '17 at 14:01

























                      answered Jun 8 '17 at 8:08









                      Harry Richman

                      905414




                      905414








                      • 1




                        this works only for three prime factors at the most
                        – yomayne
                        Jun 13 '17 at 6:51






                      • 1




                        yes, I agree that visualizing things in 4 dimensions or higher is no longer "intuitive", which is an unfortunate limitation. but I would still suggest it is the "correct" way to think about factoring and there are ways of practicing this skill, for example as described here
                        – Harry Richman
                        Jun 15 '17 at 0:23














                      • 1




                        this works only for three prime factors at the most
                        – yomayne
                        Jun 13 '17 at 6:51






                      • 1




                        yes, I agree that visualizing things in 4 dimensions or higher is no longer "intuitive", which is an unfortunate limitation. but I would still suggest it is the "correct" way to think about factoring and there are ways of practicing this skill, for example as described here
                        – Harry Richman
                        Jun 15 '17 at 0:23








                      1




                      1




                      this works only for three prime factors at the most
                      – yomayne
                      Jun 13 '17 at 6:51




                      this works only for three prime factors at the most
                      – yomayne
                      Jun 13 '17 at 6:51




                      1




                      1




                      yes, I agree that visualizing things in 4 dimensions or higher is no longer "intuitive", which is an unfortunate limitation. but I would still suggest it is the "correct" way to think about factoring and there are ways of practicing this skill, for example as described here
                      – Harry Richman
                      Jun 15 '17 at 0:23




                      yes, I agree that visualizing things in 4 dimensions or higher is no longer "intuitive", which is an unfortunate limitation. but I would still suggest it is the "correct" way to think about factoring and there are ways of practicing this skill, for example as described here
                      – Harry Richman
                      Jun 15 '17 at 0:23










                      up vote
                      1
                      down vote













                      It is not better in general. However, for various number-theoretical questions one needs the prime factorization, rather than another one. For example, the Fermat problem, asking which integers $nge 1$ are the sum of two squares, needs the prime factorization. We see that $n=30$ is not the sum of two squares, because in the prime factorization, not all factors $qequiv 3bmod 4$ occur with an even exponent. Indeed, $3$ appears with an odd exponent $1$.






                      share|cite|improve this answer

























                        up vote
                        1
                        down vote













                        It is not better in general. However, for various number-theoretical questions one needs the prime factorization, rather than another one. For example, the Fermat problem, asking which integers $nge 1$ are the sum of two squares, needs the prime factorization. We see that $n=30$ is not the sum of two squares, because in the prime factorization, not all factors $qequiv 3bmod 4$ occur with an even exponent. Indeed, $3$ appears with an odd exponent $1$.






                        share|cite|improve this answer























                          up vote
                          1
                          down vote










                          up vote
                          1
                          down vote









                          It is not better in general. However, for various number-theoretical questions one needs the prime factorization, rather than another one. For example, the Fermat problem, asking which integers $nge 1$ are the sum of two squares, needs the prime factorization. We see that $n=30$ is not the sum of two squares, because in the prime factorization, not all factors $qequiv 3bmod 4$ occur with an even exponent. Indeed, $3$ appears with an odd exponent $1$.






                          share|cite|improve this answer












                          It is not better in general. However, for various number-theoretical questions one needs the prime factorization, rather than another one. For example, the Fermat problem, asking which integers $nge 1$ are the sum of two squares, needs the prime factorization. We see that $n=30$ is not the sum of two squares, because in the prime factorization, not all factors $qequiv 3bmod 4$ occur with an even exponent. Indeed, $3$ appears with an odd exponent $1$.







                          share|cite|improve this answer












                          share|cite|improve this answer



                          share|cite|improve this answer










                          answered Jun 7 '17 at 9:47









                          Dietrich Burde

                          76.6k64286




                          76.6k64286






















                              up vote
                              1
                              down vote













                              I might explain to kids that you need it to find out if the two numbers are co-prime or not.



                              One application of co-prime (which kids might understand) is to make the gears life longer. If the number of teeth is co-prime between the meshing gears, the gears will wear evenly. Therefore, mechanical engineers try to design the number of teeth of the gear system in co-prime.






                              share|cite|improve this answer

























                                up vote
                                1
                                down vote













                                I might explain to kids that you need it to find out if the two numbers are co-prime or not.



                                One application of co-prime (which kids might understand) is to make the gears life longer. If the number of teeth is co-prime between the meshing gears, the gears will wear evenly. Therefore, mechanical engineers try to design the number of teeth of the gear system in co-prime.






                                share|cite|improve this answer























                                  up vote
                                  1
                                  down vote










                                  up vote
                                  1
                                  down vote









                                  I might explain to kids that you need it to find out if the two numbers are co-prime or not.



                                  One application of co-prime (which kids might understand) is to make the gears life longer. If the number of teeth is co-prime between the meshing gears, the gears will wear evenly. Therefore, mechanical engineers try to design the number of teeth of the gear system in co-prime.






                                  share|cite|improve this answer












                                  I might explain to kids that you need it to find out if the two numbers are co-prime or not.



                                  One application of co-prime (which kids might understand) is to make the gears life longer. If the number of teeth is co-prime between the meshing gears, the gears will wear evenly. Therefore, mechanical engineers try to design the number of teeth of the gear system in co-prime.







                                  share|cite|improve this answer












                                  share|cite|improve this answer



                                  share|cite|improve this answer










                                  answered Jun 7 '17 at 11:41









                                  Taichi Aoki

                                  237




                                  237






















                                      up vote
                                      1
                                      down vote













                                      Graphical representations of algebraic relations are sometimes more enlightning than the algebraic formula itself (see only the online catalogues of funny function-curves, of fractals or many others), so I think there is no general rule that this or that representation of numbers is more "intuitive" or "nicer"...



                                      Example: if you would consequently work with numbers in terms of their primefactorizations, then any multiplicative problem is extremely easy - but any additive problem is extremely difficult: if $z=p_1^{e_1}p_2^{e_2}$ then first the derivation and then the final expression of $z+1$ in that notational scheme is extremely difficult!



                                      We have for cultural reasons the preference for the positional decimal-digit-system which makes addition extremely simple - and multiplication a complicated operation needing computations of each single digit with each other and which also needs observing carries and what not.



                                      For the graphical representation of functions of numbers there is, if I recall the name correctly, for instance the "Moser-representation" which give hyperoperations (in the sense of a family/sequence of binary operations "+","*","^",...) a graphical representation and which arrives at a very concise notation-scheme for extremely huge numbers (see wikipedia)






                                      Besides of that, I like (to contrast many comments here) the first given representation much - as a nice geometrical and easily memorizable pattern. Don't know, whether an extension would lead to something remarkable insight or algorithmic pattern, but that what I see, pleases me much.

                                      P.s.: note that the given graphic in your question is not consistent: the pentagon should be rotated such that its sides are neighbored to the triangles and not the edges as it is shown there, compare to this corrected image:



                                      $ qquad qquad $ picture






                                      share|cite|improve this answer



























                                        up vote
                                        1
                                        down vote













                                        Graphical representations of algebraic relations are sometimes more enlightning than the algebraic formula itself (see only the online catalogues of funny function-curves, of fractals or many others), so I think there is no general rule that this or that representation of numbers is more "intuitive" or "nicer"...



                                        Example: if you would consequently work with numbers in terms of their primefactorizations, then any multiplicative problem is extremely easy - but any additive problem is extremely difficult: if $z=p_1^{e_1}p_2^{e_2}$ then first the derivation and then the final expression of $z+1$ in that notational scheme is extremely difficult!



                                        We have for cultural reasons the preference for the positional decimal-digit-system which makes addition extremely simple - and multiplication a complicated operation needing computations of each single digit with each other and which also needs observing carries and what not.



                                        For the graphical representation of functions of numbers there is, if I recall the name correctly, for instance the "Moser-representation" which give hyperoperations (in the sense of a family/sequence of binary operations "+","*","^",...) a graphical representation and which arrives at a very concise notation-scheme for extremely huge numbers (see wikipedia)






                                        Besides of that, I like (to contrast many comments here) the first given representation much - as a nice geometrical and easily memorizable pattern. Don't know, whether an extension would lead to something remarkable insight or algorithmic pattern, but that what I see, pleases me much.

                                        P.s.: note that the given graphic in your question is not consistent: the pentagon should be rotated such that its sides are neighbored to the triangles and not the edges as it is shown there, compare to this corrected image:



                                        $ qquad qquad $ picture






                                        share|cite|improve this answer

























                                          up vote
                                          1
                                          down vote










                                          up vote
                                          1
                                          down vote









                                          Graphical representations of algebraic relations are sometimes more enlightning than the algebraic formula itself (see only the online catalogues of funny function-curves, of fractals or many others), so I think there is no general rule that this or that representation of numbers is more "intuitive" or "nicer"...



                                          Example: if you would consequently work with numbers in terms of their primefactorizations, then any multiplicative problem is extremely easy - but any additive problem is extremely difficult: if $z=p_1^{e_1}p_2^{e_2}$ then first the derivation and then the final expression of $z+1$ in that notational scheme is extremely difficult!



                                          We have for cultural reasons the preference for the positional decimal-digit-system which makes addition extremely simple - and multiplication a complicated operation needing computations of each single digit with each other and which also needs observing carries and what not.



                                          For the graphical representation of functions of numbers there is, if I recall the name correctly, for instance the "Moser-representation" which give hyperoperations (in the sense of a family/sequence of binary operations "+","*","^",...) a graphical representation and which arrives at a very concise notation-scheme for extremely huge numbers (see wikipedia)






                                          Besides of that, I like (to contrast many comments here) the first given representation much - as a nice geometrical and easily memorizable pattern. Don't know, whether an extension would lead to something remarkable insight or algorithmic pattern, but that what I see, pleases me much.

                                          P.s.: note that the given graphic in your question is not consistent: the pentagon should be rotated such that its sides are neighbored to the triangles and not the edges as it is shown there, compare to this corrected image:



                                          $ qquad qquad $ picture






                                          share|cite|improve this answer














                                          Graphical representations of algebraic relations are sometimes more enlightning than the algebraic formula itself (see only the online catalogues of funny function-curves, of fractals or many others), so I think there is no general rule that this or that representation of numbers is more "intuitive" or "nicer"...



                                          Example: if you would consequently work with numbers in terms of their primefactorizations, then any multiplicative problem is extremely easy - but any additive problem is extremely difficult: if $z=p_1^{e_1}p_2^{e_2}$ then first the derivation and then the final expression of $z+1$ in that notational scheme is extremely difficult!



                                          We have for cultural reasons the preference for the positional decimal-digit-system which makes addition extremely simple - and multiplication a complicated operation needing computations of each single digit with each other and which also needs observing carries and what not.



                                          For the graphical representation of functions of numbers there is, if I recall the name correctly, for instance the "Moser-representation" which give hyperoperations (in the sense of a family/sequence of binary operations "+","*","^",...) a graphical representation and which arrives at a very concise notation-scheme for extremely huge numbers (see wikipedia)






                                          Besides of that, I like (to contrast many comments here) the first given representation much - as a nice geometrical and easily memorizable pattern. Don't know, whether an extension would lead to something remarkable insight or algorithmic pattern, but that what I see, pleases me much.

                                          P.s.: note that the given graphic in your question is not consistent: the pentagon should be rotated such that its sides are neighbored to the triangles and not the edges as it is shown there, compare to this corrected image:



                                          $ qquad qquad $ picture







                                          share|cite|improve this answer














                                          share|cite|improve this answer



                                          share|cite|improve this answer








                                          edited Jul 5 '17 at 6:52

























                                          answered Jun 8 '17 at 9:24









                                          Gottfried Helms

                                          23.1k24397




                                          23.1k24397






















                                              up vote
                                              0
                                              down vote













                                              I don't understand the top picture at all, so I wouldn't say that's simpler, because it clearly isn't.



                                              I would say that a prime factorization is better in some sense because it's easiest to deal with something once you've broken it into the simplest possible pieces. This is a general principle really: If you have a complex problem to tackle, try to break the problem in tiny pieces and deal with those.






                                              share|cite|improve this answer





















                                              • [two dots, replicated thrice] replicated five times. I picked it directly from the source. I'm not sure if the pentagon is helping in any way
                                                – yomayne
                                                Jun 8 '17 at 5:00










                                              • This answer the OP's question in the first line: "[W]hy and how is prime factorization of a number better in some sense (if at all)?" Tell me in what way does my answer not address his question?
                                                – JavaMan
                                                Jun 8 '17 at 18:43















                                              up vote
                                              0
                                              down vote













                                              I don't understand the top picture at all, so I wouldn't say that's simpler, because it clearly isn't.



                                              I would say that a prime factorization is better in some sense because it's easiest to deal with something once you've broken it into the simplest possible pieces. This is a general principle really: If you have a complex problem to tackle, try to break the problem in tiny pieces and deal with those.






                                              share|cite|improve this answer





















                                              • [two dots, replicated thrice] replicated five times. I picked it directly from the source. I'm not sure if the pentagon is helping in any way
                                                – yomayne
                                                Jun 8 '17 at 5:00










                                              • This answer the OP's question in the first line: "[W]hy and how is prime factorization of a number better in some sense (if at all)?" Tell me in what way does my answer not address his question?
                                                – JavaMan
                                                Jun 8 '17 at 18:43













                                              up vote
                                              0
                                              down vote










                                              up vote
                                              0
                                              down vote









                                              I don't understand the top picture at all, so I wouldn't say that's simpler, because it clearly isn't.



                                              I would say that a prime factorization is better in some sense because it's easiest to deal with something once you've broken it into the simplest possible pieces. This is a general principle really: If you have a complex problem to tackle, try to break the problem in tiny pieces and deal with those.






                                              share|cite|improve this answer












                                              I don't understand the top picture at all, so I wouldn't say that's simpler, because it clearly isn't.



                                              I would say that a prime factorization is better in some sense because it's easiest to deal with something once you've broken it into the simplest possible pieces. This is a general principle really: If you have a complex problem to tackle, try to break the problem in tiny pieces and deal with those.







                                              share|cite|improve this answer












                                              share|cite|improve this answer



                                              share|cite|improve this answer










                                              answered Jun 7 '17 at 11:55









                                              JavaMan

                                              10.9k12655




                                              10.9k12655












                                              • [two dots, replicated thrice] replicated five times. I picked it directly from the source. I'm not sure if the pentagon is helping in any way
                                                – yomayne
                                                Jun 8 '17 at 5:00










                                              • This answer the OP's question in the first line: "[W]hy and how is prime factorization of a number better in some sense (if at all)?" Tell me in what way does my answer not address his question?
                                                – JavaMan
                                                Jun 8 '17 at 18:43


















                                              • [two dots, replicated thrice] replicated five times. I picked it directly from the source. I'm not sure if the pentagon is helping in any way
                                                – yomayne
                                                Jun 8 '17 at 5:00










                                              • This answer the OP's question in the first line: "[W]hy and how is prime factorization of a number better in some sense (if at all)?" Tell me in what way does my answer not address his question?
                                                – JavaMan
                                                Jun 8 '17 at 18:43
















                                              [two dots, replicated thrice] replicated five times. I picked it directly from the source. I'm not sure if the pentagon is helping in any way
                                              – yomayne
                                              Jun 8 '17 at 5:00




                                              [two dots, replicated thrice] replicated five times. I picked it directly from the source. I'm not sure if the pentagon is helping in any way
                                              – yomayne
                                              Jun 8 '17 at 5:00












                                              This answer the OP's question in the first line: "[W]hy and how is prime factorization of a number better in some sense (if at all)?" Tell me in what way does my answer not address his question?
                                              – JavaMan
                                              Jun 8 '17 at 18:43




                                              This answer the OP's question in the first line: "[W]hy and how is prime factorization of a number better in some sense (if at all)?" Tell me in what way does my answer not address his question?
                                              – JavaMan
                                              Jun 8 '17 at 18:43










                                              up vote
                                              0
                                              down vote













                                              If you display your brick like pictures for $2times 15$, $3times 10$ and $6times 5$, you introduce the inverse function $y=frac{30}x$ as a bonus and state that all rectangles drawn under share the same area...






                                              share|cite|improve this answer

























                                                up vote
                                                0
                                                down vote













                                                If you display your brick like pictures for $2times 15$, $3times 10$ and $6times 5$, you introduce the inverse function $y=frac{30}x$ as a bonus and state that all rectangles drawn under share the same area...






                                                share|cite|improve this answer























                                                  up vote
                                                  0
                                                  down vote










                                                  up vote
                                                  0
                                                  down vote









                                                  If you display your brick like pictures for $2times 15$, $3times 10$ and $6times 5$, you introduce the inverse function $y=frac{30}x$ as a bonus and state that all rectangles drawn under share the same area...






                                                  share|cite|improve this answer












                                                  If you display your brick like pictures for $2times 15$, $3times 10$ and $6times 5$, you introduce the inverse function $y=frac{30}x$ as a bonus and state that all rectangles drawn under share the same area...







                                                  share|cite|improve this answer












                                                  share|cite|improve this answer



                                                  share|cite|improve this answer










                                                  answered Jun 8 '17 at 5:35









                                                  draks ...

                                                  11.6k643125




                                                  11.6k643125






















                                                      up vote
                                                      0
                                                      down vote













                                                      A prime factorization of a number $n$ is certainly useful if you are interested in all the ways of arranging $n$ units into a rectangular array.



                                                      The units could be square meters.



                                                      The units could be discrete 'dots', or people.



                                                      Say you have $30$ students in a class. You can arrange the classroom desks in a $6 times 5$ rectangular pattern. You train the students to leave the classroom in a $1 times 30$ pattern. If you are leading them out of the classroom, you train them to form a $2 times 15$ formation. In the school auditorium, the students are trained to sit in a designated $10 times 3$ section.






                                                      share|cite|improve this answer

























                                                        up vote
                                                        0
                                                        down vote













                                                        A prime factorization of a number $n$ is certainly useful if you are interested in all the ways of arranging $n$ units into a rectangular array.



                                                        The units could be square meters.



                                                        The units could be discrete 'dots', or people.



                                                        Say you have $30$ students in a class. You can arrange the classroom desks in a $6 times 5$ rectangular pattern. You train the students to leave the classroom in a $1 times 30$ pattern. If you are leading them out of the classroom, you train them to form a $2 times 15$ formation. In the school auditorium, the students are trained to sit in a designated $10 times 3$ section.






                                                        share|cite|improve this answer























                                                          up vote
                                                          0
                                                          down vote










                                                          up vote
                                                          0
                                                          down vote









                                                          A prime factorization of a number $n$ is certainly useful if you are interested in all the ways of arranging $n$ units into a rectangular array.



                                                          The units could be square meters.



                                                          The units could be discrete 'dots', or people.



                                                          Say you have $30$ students in a class. You can arrange the classroom desks in a $6 times 5$ rectangular pattern. You train the students to leave the classroom in a $1 times 30$ pattern. If you are leading them out of the classroom, you train them to form a $2 times 15$ formation. In the school auditorium, the students are trained to sit in a designated $10 times 3$ section.






                                                          share|cite|improve this answer












                                                          A prime factorization of a number $n$ is certainly useful if you are interested in all the ways of arranging $n$ units into a rectangular array.



                                                          The units could be square meters.



                                                          The units could be discrete 'dots', or people.



                                                          Say you have $30$ students in a class. You can arrange the classroom desks in a $6 times 5$ rectangular pattern. You train the students to leave the classroom in a $1 times 30$ pattern. If you are leading them out of the classroom, you train them to form a $2 times 15$ formation. In the school auditorium, the students are trained to sit in a designated $10 times 3$ section.







                                                          share|cite|improve this answer












                                                          share|cite|improve this answer



                                                          share|cite|improve this answer










                                                          answered 2 days ago









                                                          CopyPasteIt

                                                          3,7271627




                                                          3,7271627






























                                                               

                                                              draft saved


                                                              draft discarded



















































                                                               


                                                              draft saved


                                                              draft discarded














                                                              StackExchange.ready(
                                                              function () {
                                                              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2313203%2fis-prime-factorization-better%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                                              }
                                                              );

                                                              Post as a guest















                                                              Required, but never shown





















































                                                              Required, but never shown














                                                              Required, but never shown












                                                              Required, but never shown







                                                              Required, but never shown

































                                                              Required, but never shown














                                                              Required, but never shown












                                                              Required, but never shown







                                                              Required, but never shown







                                                              Popular posts from this blog

                                                              Berounka

                                                              Sphinx de Gizeh

                                                              Different font size/position of beamer's navigation symbols template's content depending on regular/plain...