Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Twin Prime Proof Proffered

Posted by samzenpus on from the is-this-going-to-be-on-the-test dept.

HateBreeder writes "Continuing on a previous slashdot story regarding Arenstorf's proof of the existence of Infinitely Many Prime Twins, it seems that a hole has recently been found in the proof, however mathematicians remain hopeful that the proof can be corrected."

13 of 179 comments (clear)

  1. Withdrawn by Agret · · Score: 5, Informative

    The paper has since been withdrawn with the reason "A serious error has been found in the paper, specifically, Lemma 8 is incorrect."

    --
    Have you metaroderated recently?
    1. Re:Withdrawn by metlin · · Score: 4, Informative


      Yeah, it's likely it'll take a long time to fix it.

      Gerald Tenenbaum (the guy who pointed out the mistake) is quite well known, so if he feels that this affects the paper badly, it's probably quite true - and it maybe a while before people get around coming up with an alternative.

      (I know this because Tenenbaum is known to my advisor, Jean Bellissard.)

    2. Re:Withdrawn by metlin · · Score: 4, Informative

      Here is the original paper.

      (it might be gone soon, though - it's an arXiv mirror)

      Lemma 8 is on Page 35 -


      Lemma 8 Let r(v) and (v) of class C1(v0,), 0 r(v) v0 = 1/2 N0; and let (v) in C0(v ,) be such that

      *defines an integral limit for K as a function of (T) for certain values of T, and gives the boundary and limit conditions*

      Although this made sense, the proof is kinda over my head, though. :-)

      Btw - which dept were you at GT?

    3. Re:Withdrawn by metlin · · Score: 2, Informative

      Bellissard seriously rocks.

      He's one of the people responsible for theoretical QC research in GATech -- along with Chapman and a few other folks from GTRI such as John Cortese.

      He's also the former editor of the really respected Theoretical Physics journal, Annales de l'Institut Henri Poincaré.

      Brilliant professor, and a wonderful person.

  2. I like a good alliteration as much as anyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Probably more than most. Sadly, that's not what proffered means.

    It was proffered a long time ago. The news is that it doesn't work. May I suggest punctured?

    1. Re:I like a good alliteration as much as anyone by Agret · · Score: 2, Informative

      To offer for acceptance; tender. See Synonyms at offer.

      The act of proffering; an offer.

      2. To essay or attempt of one's own accord; to undertake, or propose to undertake

      --
      Have you metaroderated recently?
  3. old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The mistake was found back in June

  4. The Real Twin-Prime Proof by bearnol · · Score: 3, Informative

    http://www.bearnol.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Math/wanle ss2.html

  5. Re:twin primes. by fymidos · · Score: 3, Informative

    >claim of infinite primes to be troubling

    it is not a claim, it was proven a long long time ago.
    This proof is about infinite number of "prime twins" , primes that are next to each other (like 11-13)

    --
    Washington bullets will simply be known as the "Bulle
  6. Re:twin primes. by isometrick · · Score: 4, Informative

    I think the average maximum difference between primes may increase as primes grow higher (prime density decreases), but twin primes (primes of form p and p+2) continue to exist so the minimum difference for any range can still be very low. IMHO, numerology should be treated like any other -ology, but I did find one reference to what you are talking about: The Music of the Primes, however the site seems to be gone/down. Good luck with your search!

  7. Re:twin primes. by metlin · · Score: 2, Informative

    IMHO, numerology should be treated like any other -ology,

    Errr, numerology is more of a mystical study, considered to be pseudoscience.

    Perhaps you meant Number Theory?

  8. Re:twin primes. by metlin · · Score: 2, Informative

    Ah, my bad. I thought you were talking of Primes in P w.r.t. numerology, and being a physicist completely ignored the rest of the content =)

    Been up all night, need more sleep.

    No. %s/g/sleep/coffee. Better!

  9. Re:twin primes. by miskatonic+alumnus · · Score: 2, Informative

    You cannot conclude that p1*...pn+1 is prime. For example 2*3*5*7*11*13+1 = 30031, which is divisible by 59, hence NOT prime. However, what you CAN conclude is that p1*...pn+1 is either prime, or has a prime factor larger than any of the given pk's.