These two days of server don't know what mess, life is not going, I am anxious to be like a backyard, but there is a key to someone. If you say, what makes me feel more, I'm a low level of BG's debate.
Most of the arguments are concentrated in that classic algorithm. I believe many people from non-computer sciences are like me, see that the algorithm is the first, I don't know what it is doing. I am more impulsive and ultra-low levels of negation, now I really regret it. I summed up the information about the screening method, and now I haven't hanging it now, and I will go out and go out. The purpose is to let more people can understand this algorithm, not to commit me such a mistake, and to everyone - the future will never have such a boring article.
Quietly to see that the algorithm is really a very cultivated thing - especially as the "screening" is simple and classic algorithm. "Screening" is not aimed at the computer's optimization algorithm, which was discovered by Greek mathematics Elttny more than 2,000 years ago. What is its principle? In fact, it is very simple, you can understand it for three minutes.
First arrange n natural numbers in order. 1 is not a prime number, nor a compliance, to take it. The second number 2 is the number of prime numbers, and all the numbers behind 2 can be taken away. 2 The first number of the first is not drawn is 3, leave 3 left, and then all the numbers behind 3 can be taken away. 3 The number behind the first is 5, leave 5, and then all the numbers behind 5 can be scored. This has been done, and all the total number of no more than N will be sieved. The left is not exceeding the total number of n. Because the Greek writes the number on the panel of the Lara, it is necessary to remember the number, just after seeking the work, this many small points are like a screen, so it is image The method of Eratsteny is called "Eltosteri], referred to as" screening ".
You can take a look at this picture, like a big screen?
In fact, the classics of the screening method are not just how good it is; in history, people are even more indirectly proven by the screening method. This seemingly obvious fact of "there is no maximum number". Hey, can you prove it?
