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."

7 of 179 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Tenenbaum? by nbert · · Score: 2, Insightful

    G. Tenenbaum != Andrew S. Tanenbaum

    --
    I don't read replies by ACs.
  2. Re:twin primes. by Moderatbastard · · Score: 1, Insightful
    maximum and minimums grow ever higher
    It's maxima and minima. And I would have thought that the latter tend to grow ever lower...
    --
    1/3 of jokes get modded OT. If you get the joke, mod 1 in 3 insightful/interesting/underrated to restore karma balance.
  3. Re:Not quite ready for prime time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Umm.... cryptography? You ever use SSL?

  4. Poor hyperlinking by BarryNorton · · Score: 2, Insightful

    While Slashdot stories (unlike most of the Flash-based web) can be a good example of hyperlinking, this story (after the first link) was appalling - why was the link to the withdrawal placed around the words 'infinitiely many twin primes'? Not only did I immediately wonder why there seemed to be no link to evidence of the withdrawal, but there was no direct link to explain what the twin prime conjecture is...

  5. Treat any -ology the same? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Is this intended to be a positive or negative treatment of -ology words in general.

    Either way it is silly. We have:

    Numerology

    Geology

    Astrology

    Zoology

    Scientology

    Psycology

    Phrenology

    Biology

    Theology

    Anaesthesiology

    Do you really advocate treating all these the same?

  6. Re:twin primes. by Rufus88 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It is a proved fact that there are arbitrarily large gaps in the prime sequence (i.e. infinitely large gaps).

    Yes and no. "Arbitrarily large" is not the same thing as "infinitely large". If there were an infinitely large gap, there couldn't be a subsequent prime.

  7. Good thing we are all really nerds here by Hao+Wu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Luckily since we are all true "geeks" here at Slashdot, we can understand this math as we read through it. It's not like we're all posers who are really only interested in trendy politics, media, and video games.

    --
    I suggest you read Slashdot