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

22746Re: Prime 19-tuplet

Expand Messages
  • woodhodgson@xtra.co.nz
    Jun 1, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In primenumbers@yahoogroups.com, Tom Hadley <kctom99@...> wrote:
      >
      > On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 3:48 PM, Maximilian Hasler
      > <maximilian.hasler@...> wrote:
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 2:57 PM, woodhodgson@...
      > > <rupert.weather@...> wrote:
      > > >
      > > > The first 19-tuplet (I think), 630134041802574490482213901 +
      > > > {0, 6, 10, 16, 18, 22, 28, 30, 36, 42, 46, 48, 52, 58, 60, 66, 70, 72, 76},
      > > > gives one a "century" with (at least) 19 primes. Still a long way off from the
      > > > possible century maximum of 23 in computational terms, I imagine.
      > > >
      > >
      > > In the 1st century, you have 25 primes :
      > >
      > > 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31, 37, 41, 43, 47, 53, 59, 61,
      > > 67, 71, 73, 79, 83, 89, 97.
      > >
      > > For further information, see http://oeis.org/A186311
      > >
      > > Maximilian
      > >
      >
      > The first 25 primes do not make an admissible constellation. It is
      > impossible to find that pattern repeated anywhere else.
      >
      > Tom
      >

      That's why I quoted 23, ignoring the "special" first century. There is no reason to rule out the existence of some 23-tuple "inside" a century somewhere.
    • Show all 37 messages in this topic