## Re: [PrimeNumbers] Twin Prime Puzzle

Expand Messages
• I can give you the beginning of the full sequence. It is
Message 1 of 12 , Aug 30, 2013
I can give you the beginning of the full sequence.

It is 10,16,18,22,24,30,34,36,42,46,48,54,60,64,66,72,76,78,84,90,102,106,108,112,114,120,126,132,138,142,144,150,156,158,168,180,198,210,240,246 . . .

That is as far as paper and pencil takes me, and I might have made some typo errors.

Incidentally, I have not laid claim to any proof of anything whatsoever.

I just wanted to know how far primorial 30 extends into this realm.

Kind regards

Bob

On 31 Aug 2013, at 01:06, "Jens Kruse Andersen" <jens.k.a@...> wrote:

> Bob Gilson wrote:
> > I presume that this pattern must break down at some point - could
> > someone tell me where?
>
> David is almost certainly right here. Twin primes aren't that rare.
> See Harvey Dubner's "Twin Prime Conjectures":
> http://oeis.org/A007534/a007534.pdf
> and http://oeis.org/A179825 which probably only has those 11 terms.
> None of them are multiples of 30 (that's no coincidence; small factors
> improve the odds).
> But the keyword "fini" (a finite sequence) seems inappropriate
> when it's only a conjecture. If conjectured keywords are
> acceptable then you might as well go full out and say "full" (the full
> sequence is given).
> http://oeis.org/A007534 also claims "fini" and then says
> "Conjectured to be complete" in the extensions field.
>
> --
> Jens Kruse Andersen
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
• ... No. The twin prime conjecture is based on the heuristic that n increases faster than log(n)^2. The present conjecture is based on the heuristic that n
Message 2 of 12 , Aug 30, 2013

> If this is the case then isn't this a proof of the twin primes
> conjecture ?

No. The twin prime conjecture is based on the heuristic
that n increases faster than log(n)^2.

The present conjecture is based on the heuristic
that n increases faster than log(n)^4.

You can keep on going, piling on extra conditions.
In general, every constellation that is not forbidden
is expected to occur an infinite number of times.

David
•  Wow!  The home pages of the groups just got incredibly ugly and dysfunctional in a complete appearance and function change which made it way worse
Message 3 of 12 , Aug 31, 2013
Wow!  The home pages of the groups just got incredibly ugly and dysfunctional in a complete appearance and function change which made it way worse and also deleted the "pictures" (a big picture of the number 2, in the case of primenumbers). Plus there are now giant ads obscuring most of the screen. Is yahoo intentionally trying to make everybody go away? --- In primenumbers@yahoogroups.com, <david.broadhurst@...> wrote: --- In primenumbers@yahoogroups.com , whygee@... wrote:

> If this is the case then isn't this a proof of the twin primes
> conjecture ?

No. The twin prime conjecture is based on the heuristic
that n increases faster than log(n)^2.

The present conjecture is based on the heuristic
that n increases faster than log(n)^4.

You can keep on going, piling on extra conditions.
In general, every constellation that is not forbidden
is expected to occur an infinite number of times.

David
• ... I jump straight to http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/primenumbers/messages which seems for the time being to be ad-free. David
Message 4 of 12 , Sep 1, 2013

>  Wow!  The home pages of the groups just got incredibly ugly and dysfunctional

I jump straight to
which seems for the time being to be ad-free.

David
•  In case I never am able to contact you chaps again, because of Yahoo (Boohoo), it has been a pleasure to know you all.
Message 5 of 12 , Sep 1, 2013
In case I never am able to contact you chaps again, because of Yahoo (Boohoo), it has been a pleasure to know you all.
--- In primenumbers@yahoogroups.com , <warren.wds@...> wrote: >  Wow!  The home pages of the groups just got incredibly ugly and dysfunctional I jump straight to http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/primenumbers/messages which seems for the time being to be ad-free. David
•  I tried David's workaround, but the bastewards change the "groups" to "neo/groups". I am furious about this! ...  In case I
Message 6 of 12 , Sep 1, 2013
I tried David's workaround, but the bastewards change the "groups" to "neo/groups". I am furious about this!
In case I never am able to contact you chaps again, because of Yahoo (Boohoo), it has been a pleasure to know you all.   --- In primenumbers@yahoogroups.com , <david.broadhurst@...> wrote: --- In primenumbers@yahoogroups.com , <warren.wds@...> wrote: >  Wow!  The home pages of the groups just got incredibly ugly and dysfunctional I jump straight to http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/primenumbers/messages which seems for the time being to be ad-free. David
• ... Try starting at http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/ It seems to be a US/UK thing at present. But no doubt they will make this pond-side suffer like you, real soon.
Message 7 of 12 , Sep 1, 2013

>  I tried David's workaround, but the bastewards
> change the "groups" to "neo/groups".

Try starting at

http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/

It seems to be a US/UK thing at present.
But no doubt they will make this pond-side
suffer like you, real soon.

http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/26251.html

David
• ... I looked to see if managers can keep their groups classic . Seems not: http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/GroupManagersForum/message/43342 et seqq. David
Message 8 of 12 , Sep 1, 2013
>
> --- In primenumbers@yahoogroups.com, <mistermac39@> wrote:
>
> >  I tried David's workaround, but the bastewards
> > change the "groups" to "neo/groups".