A Brief History on Primes

1. (Difficulty) I understood most of the information because I have sen it before, but I did not get all of the proof that 2^n-1 being prime implies that n is prime. I understand how it was used, but the proof was just done quickly, so I didn't understand it all. Other than that I followed most of the talk because it was a review from previous math classes, including cryptography.

2. (Reflective) I liked that fact that the talk was very simple and made sense. You didn't need to know a lot, or anything specifically, about number theory to understand the lecture. I have heard about several of those theorems many times, and it just shows how important they really are. I have seen Fermat's little theorem in three class, and this was the fourth exposure to it. It is amazing how useful primes are, and yet we still do not know how to prove several of the conjectures mentioned in the talk. The conjectures seem so simple, but the proofs are far from that. I think that is really interesting. Many of the conjectures seem so simple, but yet we do not know of their authenticity. Number theory must be a fascinating branch of mathematics, which I would like to more about.