Date: Sun, 16 May 2004 12:57:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Keith F. Lynch" <kfl at KeithLynch.net>
To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Cicadas and prime numbers
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>

Ron Kean wrote:

> I remember Keith having offered some explanation, but I had
> forgotten the details.  And the web sites I googled did not provide
> an answer as to why 17 would be so much better than 15, 16, or 18.

>From my article in January's WSFA Journal:

  It's not chance that their return rate is a prime number.  A fifteen
  year locust would be prey for a three year or a five year predator.
  But a seventeen year locust can only be prey for a seventeen year
  predator.  No doubt one will eventually evolve, drive the locusts
  to extinction, then go extinct itself.  I'm sure this has already
  happened numerous times over the ages.

> http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=2647052

I see that they've been reading the WSFA Journal.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.