## Twin Prime Gaps

Expand Messages
• Always 2... Remind me to ask a comedian... Does the law of averages state that given a twin prime, the gap (no primes) between either the lower prime and the
Message 1 of 3 , Aug 2 3:29 PM
Always 2...

Remind me to ask a comedian...

Does the law of averages state that given a twin prime, the gap (no primes)
between either the lower prime and the previous prime, or the higher prime
and the next larger prime, is unbounded?

http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~perry/maths/twinprimeconjecture/twinprimec
onjecture.htm

proves that there are an infinite number of twin primes, so I expect the
answer to be positive, but hence, what twin primes are the record breakers?

Jon Perry
perry@...
http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~perry/maths/
BrainBench MVP for HTML and JavaScript
http://www.brainbench.com
• ... What do you mean? Regardless of the twin prime conjecture (is your proof published?), elementary reasoning shows that there exist infinitely large gaps
Message 2 of 3 , Aug 3 12:54 PM
> Does the law of averages state that given a twin prime, the gap (no primes)
> between either the lower prime and the previous prime, or the higher prime
> and the next larger prime, is unbounded?

What do you mean? Regardless of the twin prime conjecture (is your proof
published?), elementary reasoning shows that there exist infinitely
large gaps between primes. There is nothing to suggest that these large
gaps would occur around a twin prime pair, however. Known results are
never that specific.

Andy
• ... Regarding this proof. So you proceed to derive the necessary form of an integer that has at least one odd anti divisor, and produce these nice symmetric
Message 3 of 3 , Aug 4 4:43 AM
> http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~perry/maths/twinprimeconjecture/twinprimec
> onjecture.htm
>
> proves that there are an infinite number of twin primes, so I expect the
> answer to be positive, but hence, what twin primes are the record breakers?

Regarding this proof. So you proceed to derive the necessary form of an
integer that has at least one odd anti divisor, and produce these nice
symmetric equations involving a and k. Fair enough.

But can you explain the last part to me? The bit starting with "all the 'k' can only copy the values of 'a'...". I'm afraid it makes no sense to me at all.
Surely you don't mean take a=k?

Andy
Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.