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

20037Re: 2^m+3^n and 2^n+3^m

Expand Messages
  • David Broadhurst
    Apr 9, 2009
      --- In primenumbers@yahoogroups.com,
      "Mark Underwood" <mark.underwood@...> wrote:

      > that 1679,1743, .. sequence, it is not only hard computing,
      > but psychologically difficult as well,
      > to find a *lack* of primes.
      > Actually finding primes (especially unique ones)
      > is so much more fun!

      "Des goƻts et des couleurs, on ne discute pas."
      [About tastes and colours, one does not argue.]

      However, I remark that my sequence of blanks is *easier*
      to generate, up to a given size of n, than is your
      preferred sequence of unique hits, since for the former
      we may "step to next n" after the first hit, but for the
      latter only after the second.

    • Show all 22 messages in this topic