There is something interesting to me.........in the distribution of primes...........I am fairly sure the notation of pi to the number............as for the exact number of primes up to a certain number was no accident, a ton of books state the notation of pi (x).........as for the true number of primes below a power of ten was an accident..........I don't think so......Guass stated he had found a close approx. for the distribution of primes based on the curvature of a circle (I stated all that tons of times before, but as I have to repeat every mfn thing).............as I typed..............a while back........I get closer results using pi as the base of a logarithm than I do for the inverse of e..............

I get that..........when using ms excel..........................using n/ln x..........................

4
22
145
1,086
8,686
72,382
620,421
5,428,681
48,254,942
434,294,482
3,948,131,654
36,191,206,825
334,072,678,387
3,102,103,442,166
28,952,965,460,217