Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

17059Re: [PrimeNumbers] Re: Brocard's Conjecture, and other notes

Expand Messages
  • Jeremy Wood
    Oct 7, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      After work I'll revisit everything again. In the
      meantime I kept the file online, but put red notes
      around the incorrect section.

      But the paper still points out -- although it doesn't
      formally prove -- that:
      pi(p(i+1)^2)>=r(i)*(p(i+1)^2)+i-1
      where r(i) =
      (p(1)-1)/p(1)*(p(2)-1)/p(2)*...(p(i)-1)/p(i)

      If anyone has any thoughts as to how one could apply
      this towards Brocard's Conjecture, please let me know.
      Or if this is also flawed, please let me know.

      Cheers
      - Jeremy Wood

      --- Patrick Capelle <patrick.capelle@...> wrote:

      > --- In primenumbers@yahoogroups.com, Jeremy
      > <mickleness@y...> wrote:
      > >
      > > Hi everyone... I just joined the list.
      > >
      > > I wrote a little paper on primes recently,
      > offering an informal proof
      > > of Brocard's Conjecture. a few notes on twin
      > primes. and other
      > > observations.
      > >
      > > I was wondering if people on this list could look
      > it over and let me
      > > know... well... if it has any merit. I'm
      > competent at math, but
      > > proofs and high level math are a little foreign to
      > me...
      > >
      > > http://homepage.mac.com/bricolage1/essays/
      > >
      >
      >
      > Hello Jeremy,
      >
      > At the beginning of your proof of Brocard's
      > conjecture,you wrote :
      > "Well if d-b >= k, and a >= b and c >= d, then
      > surely c-a >= k ".
      > Surely not.There are cases where c-a < k.
      > Take for instance a = 5, b = 2, c = 7, d = 6 and k =
      > 3.
      >
      > Regards,
      > Patrick Capelle.
      >
      >
      >
      >
    • Show all 5 messages in this topic