Mathematics desk
< September 16	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 18 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Mathematics Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

September 17

Why do some people consider 1 a prime number??

We know 1 is neither prime nor composite. But the POV that 1 is a prime number still exists and why do some people still use it?? Georgia guy (talk) 13:58, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Georgia guy: You should ask those people, possibly. If I had to guess I'd say they probably learned a wrong description of the notion as 'a number which divides only by 1 and by itself'. The number 1 satisfies this requirement hence the believers consider 1 to be prime. --CiaPan (talk) 15:36, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) It is purely a matter of the definition, which is as it is because it is mathematically the most convenient one to use in the fundamental theorem of arithmetic. A slightly careless but commonly used definition is that a number is a prime number if it is divisible only by 1 and itself.^[1][2][3] The number 1 is not divisible by other numbers than 1 and itself, so it fits this definition. If this is how people have learned, or remember, the definition, it makes sense that they consider 1 a prime. The reason it is explicitly excluded in the definition of prime number is that if it is allowed in, the uniqueness of factorizations no longer holds: 4 = 2 × 2 = 1 × 2 × 2 = 1 × 1 × 2 × 2. One could have made a different choice, including 1 in the pantheon of prime numbers, while formulating the fundamental theorem of arithmetic as "every positive natural number is the product of a unique multiset of prime numbers that are larger than 1". By the way, our article Fundamental theorem of arithmetic confines its applicability to integers greater than 1, but 1 too is the product of a unique multiset of primes: the empty multiset. --Lambiam 16:03, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

100 years or so ago, I think they did consider 1 as prime. But then it is an exception in many theorems. It is bad enough that 2 is prime. :-)

Already in Euclid's Elements (Book 7, Definitions), the number 1 was not a prime. Called a "unit" (μονάς – monás), it was not even considered a number (ἀριθμός – arithmós), let alone a prime number (πρῶτος ἀριθμός – prôtos arithmós). To qualify as a number, an entity had to consist of a multitude (πλῆθος – plêthos) of units. --Lambiam 07:22, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]