There was a problem on searching for primes which, if their decimal notation is reverted, yield another primes, like 37 => 73 or 13 => 31. Some of colleagues pointed to the term Emirp invented for such values.
But since being an Emirp depends on numeral system I'm curious, what kind of corelation could exist here. I thought "intuitively" that if the base of numeral system is prime, then there will be more emirps.
I've tried to count emirps among first 100000 of primes with different bases:
base emirps
2 11117
3 10105
4 8426
5 10929
6 3921
7 9809
8 4694
9 6998
10 5985
11 11976
So it looks like my suggestion is correct. However I have no idea what more precise law may lie below this fact.
So the question is - could anyone hint on what qualities / properties of numbers may affect the frequency of encountering emirps. May the phi(N) be somehow related?
P.S. Numbers in my example could be somewhat rough due to method of counting, however I believe they reflect the tendency.
If $n$ has many divisors, the last digit of the base-$n$ representation of a prime will be significantly restricted. It follows that the first digit of an emirp will also be significantly restricted. (For example, in base $10$, no prime that starts with $2$, $4$, $5$, $6$, or $8$ can be an emirp.)
More precisely, a base-$n$ emirp has $\phi(n)$ possible first digits, where $\phi(n)$ is Euler's totient function, and so a randomly selected prime will have roughly a $\phi(n)/(n-1)$ chance of not being excluded from emirpality (ytilamirp?) simply by virtue of its first digit. If this is all that's going on, the third row of this extended version of your table should be considerably smoother than the second:
...which indeed it seems to be, if I haven't made any mistakes.