Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun. Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ π -¹ ² ³ °

You are not logged in.

- Topics: Active | Unanswered

**Stangerzv****Member**- Registered: 2012-01-30
- Posts: 173

Where P1, P2,...,Pn are the consecutive primes and Ps is the resulting Prime

Example:

Maybe this is the only prime of this form.

*Last edited by Stangerzv (2013-04-15 03:56:41)*

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 82,672

Hi;

How high did you go?

I went to

{2,3,5,7,...7919} with no new ones found.

**In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.**

Offline

**Stangerzv****Member**- Registered: 2012-01-30
- Posts: 173

Hi bobbym

Kool, can you paste the number pairs?

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 82,672

Hi;

What number pairs?

I can paste anything you want as long as you make it clear what you want.

**In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.**

Offline

**Stangerzv****Member**- Registered: 2012-01-30
- Posts: 173

I see you went up to 7919 and found none. I thought you have found one, I think it would be impossible to find the others as the largest twin primes which differ by 2 so far is having 200,700 digits

. So, finding a twin primes which differ by two and also a summation of consecutive multiplied primes +- 1 could be impossible, I guess.*Last edited by Stangerzv (2013-04-15 14:14:01)*

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 82,672

It might be impossible, I found the same result for your other thread. When researching your idea, I could find no mention of it in the literature.

**In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.**

Offline

**Stangerzv****Member**- Registered: 2012-01-30
- Posts: 173

I love to play with the numbers and usually I don't claim it is mine until it is proven a novel idea. Because it is kinda frustration to know someone else has found it. I think the generalized formulation could be written as P1P2..Pn+-(Pn-1)=Ps, where all of them are prime.

Offline