I think the current definition of a prime number is that it must be a whole number greater than one, and have no positive divisors other than itself and one.
I think they excluded 1 as a prime number, not because it's not applying to the rule (before they apparently added the greater than 1 bit), but because its presence screws up the applications of prime numbers in mathematical systems.
Prime numbers cannot be divided, so cannot be whole number squares. But 1 is a square number. That's why it isn't a prime!
However, the real reason that 1 is no longer considered prime is because it's useful to think of prime numbers as the building blocks of all numbers (like atoms) and every number can be made by a unique combination of prime numbers. This is the Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic. But if you allow 1 to be a prime number, to any combination of primes can be added any number of "x1"'s, which means there isn't a single way of making any number, but an infinity of them. Which is not useful. So 1 was removed from the list of primes. It allows the Fundamental Theorem to be a theorem, and not a theorem as long as you exclude 1. 1 is excluded by definition.
No, it isn't. Seven is a prime number because it has two factors: 1 and itself. The statement that prime numbers cannot be divided is incorrect. Any whole number can be divided by 1.
There is controversy around this, and the mathematic community also doesn't completely agree with this. I think 1 should be included as an option here.
Can you add Fox Hunt as an answer for the English sport? I only put that and didn't think to put Fox Hunting because I thought if just saying fox hunt alone wasn't right then that wasn't it. Dumb on my part but I would like if that was added.
Except that brings up the old complaint that those of us who quickly type fox hunting now have ing as the beginning of the next answer. You can please some of the people all of the time, and you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time. (With apologies to Abraham Lincoln.)
As a Brooklynite, I know I speak for the millions of us who bristle at the idea of Coney Island being in New York City. We in the outer boroughs DO NOT refer to our city as New York, but rather Brooklyn,, or Jamaica, or Kew Gardens, or the Bronx, etc. That being said, I did correctly answer the question. Sigh.
According to your idea, you're in favour of everybody in the world thinking New York City is Manhattan and Manhattan alone. But if I lived in Brooklyn, the Bronx or Queens, I would accept with pride the label of "resident of New York City". From a British life long devotee of NYC.
So you pay your city taxes to the City of Brooklyn? When there's a crime, you call the Brooklyn PD, when there's a fire you call the Kew Gardens FD? No. You live in the City of New York, but you live in the borough of Brooklyn and you have both a mayor and a borough president.
My family is originally from Brooklyn, and I grew up in Queens...I have no idea where you are getting your statement from. There is certainly pride in whichever borough you're from...but everyone I know in Queens or Brooklyn says they're from "the city." And most of them get annoyed, frankly, when outsiders think New York City is only Manhattan.
It was the first thing that popped into my head. Scott and both the Young brothers were born in Scotland, even if the band was formed in Australia.
Maybe not the best of questions.
You never see cabooses on trains nowadays, unless it's an excursion or historic line. In the US, now, the last car is like any other, except that it has a Flashing Rear End Device (FRED) or an End of Train (EOT) device.
Think you are being a little controversial referring to "fox hunting" as a sport! The reason it is banned is because the majority of the country felt otherwise. Think the term is a "bloodsport" if you need to use the word sport.
The word "sport" has always referred to hunting. I'm not a big fan of fox hunting, but I am also not a fan of twisting the English language into knots.
I am slighty upset that boa restrictor is not accepted for world's heaviest snake since the green anaconda is a sub-species of boa constrictor but I suppose that green anaconda is more precise.
Anaconda is also accepted, keep in mind a boa constrictor is a whole set of snakes that kill through, you guessed it, constricting themselves to suffocate their prey.
However, the real reason that 1 is no longer considered prime is because it's useful to think of prime numbers as the building blocks of all numbers (like atoms) and every number can be made by a unique combination of prime numbers. This is the Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic. But if you allow 1 to be a prime number, to any combination of primes can be added any number of "x1"'s, which means there isn't a single way of making any number, but an infinity of them. Which is not useful. So 1 was removed from the list of primes. It allows the Fundamental Theorem to be a theorem, and not a theorem as long as you exclude 1. 1 is excluded by definition.