Question about the k-tuples conjecture












2












$begingroup$


On the "Prime Arithmetic Progression" page on Wolfram MathWorld, it states that a special case of the k-tuples conjecture is that there are infinitely long prime arithmetic sequences (arithmetic sequences for which all terms are prime)



But why doesn't this proof disprove that?



Let $a+dn$ be the $n$th term of any arithmetic progression. When $a=n$, the equation becomes $a(1+n)$, which obviously can't be prime because it is the product of two integers. Therefore, all infinite arithmetic progressions have at least one composite number.






proof-verification prime-numbers







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Of course, no arithmetic progression can produce only primes. This is even true for polynomials with integer coefficients. The meaning of the statement is : For every arbitary large $k$, there is an arithmetic progression of length $k$ producing only primes (I think this has been proven, but it is not known whether the statement remains true if the primes have to be consecutive)
    $endgroup$
    – Peter
    Mar 18 '17 at 23:05








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    In the Wolfram article on PAP, if you follow the link in the second paragraph (mathworld.wolfram.com/k-TupleConjecture.html), that article, near the bottom, describes the special case, "prime patterns conjecture", mentioned in the PAP article. It goes on to say that there are arbitrarily long APs of primes. Note arbitrarily long is not the same as infinite. IMO the PAP article, is at best confusing, in talking about the "prime patterns conjecture".
    $endgroup$
    – Χpẘ
    Mar 18 '17 at 23:42






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Indeed, the Wolfram article uses the exact phrase "infinitely long prime arithmetic progressions", which is not accurate: "arbitrarily long prime arithmetic progressions" is what is meant. So the OP's objection is quite valid!
    $endgroup$
    – Greg Martin
    Mar 18 '17 at 23:43






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Minor correction: $a(1+n)$ should be $a(1+d)$.
    $endgroup$
    – hardmath
    Mar 19 '17 at 0:14
















2












$begingroup$


On the "Prime Arithmetic Progression" page on Wolfram MathWorld, it states that a special case of the k-tuples conjecture is that there are infinitely long prime arithmetic sequences (arithmetic sequences for which all terms are prime)



But why doesn't this proof disprove that?



Let $a+dn$ be the $n$th term of any arithmetic progression. When $a=n$, the equation becomes $a(1+n)$, which obviously can't be prime because it is the product of two integers. Therefore, all infinite arithmetic progressions have at least one composite number.






proof-verification prime-numbers







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Of course, no arithmetic progression can produce only primes. This is even true for polynomials with integer coefficients. The meaning of the statement is : For every arbitary large $k$, there is an arithmetic progression of length $k$ producing only primes (I think this has been proven, but it is not known whether the statement remains true if the primes have to be consecutive)
    $endgroup$
    – Peter
    Mar 18 '17 at 23:05








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    In the Wolfram article on PAP, if you follow the link in the second paragraph (mathworld.wolfram.com/k-TupleConjecture.html), that article, near the bottom, describes the special case, "prime patterns conjecture", mentioned in the PAP article. It goes on to say that there are arbitrarily long APs of primes. Note arbitrarily long is not the same as infinite. IMO the PAP article, is at best confusing, in talking about the "prime patterns conjecture".
    $endgroup$
    – Χpẘ
    Mar 18 '17 at 23:42






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Indeed, the Wolfram article uses the exact phrase "infinitely long prime arithmetic progressions", which is not accurate: "arbitrarily long prime arithmetic progressions" is what is meant. So the OP's objection is quite valid!
    $endgroup$
    – Greg Martin
    Mar 18 '17 at 23:43






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Minor correction: $a(1+n)$ should be $a(1+d)$.
    $endgroup$
    – hardmath
    Mar 19 '17 at 0:14














2












2








2





$begingroup$


On the "Prime Arithmetic Progression" page on Wolfram MathWorld, it states that a special case of the k-tuples conjecture is that there are infinitely long prime arithmetic sequences (arithmetic sequences for which all terms are prime)



But why doesn't this proof disprove that?



Let $a+dn$ be the $n$th term of any arithmetic progression. When $a=n$, the equation becomes $a(1+n)$, which obviously can't be prime because it is the product of two integers. Therefore, all infinite arithmetic progressions have at least one composite number.






proof-verification prime-numbers







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




On the "Prime Arithmetic Progression" page on Wolfram MathWorld, it states that a special case of the k-tuples conjecture is that there are infinitely long prime arithmetic sequences (arithmetic sequences for which all terms are prime)



But why doesn't this proof disprove that?



Let $a+dn$ be the $n$th term of any arithmetic progression. When $a=n$, the equation becomes $a(1+n)$, which obviously can't be prime because it is the product of two integers. Therefore, all infinite arithmetic progressions have at least one composite number.






proof-verification prime-numbers




proof-verification prime-numbers






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Mar 18 '17 at 22:57









TreFoxTreFox

1,98411034




1,98411034








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Of course, no arithmetic progression can produce only primes. This is even true for polynomials with integer coefficients. The meaning of the statement is : For every arbitary large $k$, there is an arithmetic progression of length $k$ producing only primes (I think this has been proven, but it is not known whether the statement remains true if the primes have to be consecutive)
    $endgroup$
    – Peter
    Mar 18 '17 at 23:05








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    In the Wolfram article on PAP, if you follow the link in the second paragraph (mathworld.wolfram.com/k-TupleConjecture.html), that article, near the bottom, describes the special case, "prime patterns conjecture", mentioned in the PAP article. It goes on to say that there are arbitrarily long APs of primes. Note arbitrarily long is not the same as infinite. IMO the PAP article, is at best confusing, in talking about the "prime patterns conjecture".
    $endgroup$
    – Χpẘ
    Mar 18 '17 at 23:42






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Indeed, the Wolfram article uses the exact phrase "infinitely long prime arithmetic progressions", which is not accurate: "arbitrarily long prime arithmetic progressions" is what is meant. So the OP's objection is quite valid!
    $endgroup$
    – Greg Martin
    Mar 18 '17 at 23:43






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Minor correction: $a(1+n)$ should be $a(1+d)$.
    $endgroup$
    – hardmath
    Mar 19 '17 at 0:14














  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Of course, no arithmetic progression can produce only primes. This is even true for polynomials with integer coefficients. The meaning of the statement is : For every arbitary large $k$, there is an arithmetic progression of length $k$ producing only primes (I think this has been proven, but it is not known whether the statement remains true if the primes have to be consecutive)
    $endgroup$
    – Peter
    Mar 18 '17 at 23:05








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    In the Wolfram article on PAP, if you follow the link in the second paragraph (mathworld.wolfram.com/k-TupleConjecture.html), that article, near the bottom, describes the special case, "prime patterns conjecture", mentioned in the PAP article. It goes on to say that there are arbitrarily long APs of primes. Note arbitrarily long is not the same as infinite. IMO the PAP article, is at best confusing, in talking about the "prime patterns conjecture".
    $endgroup$
    – Χpẘ
    Mar 18 '17 at 23:42






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Indeed, the Wolfram article uses the exact phrase "infinitely long prime arithmetic progressions", which is not accurate: "arbitrarily long prime arithmetic progressions" is what is meant. So the OP's objection is quite valid!
    $endgroup$
    – Greg Martin
    Mar 18 '17 at 23:43






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Minor correction: $a(1+n)$ should be $a(1+d)$.
    $endgroup$
    – hardmath
    Mar 19 '17 at 0:14








1




1




$begingroup$
Of course, no arithmetic progression can produce only primes. This is even true for polynomials with integer coefficients. The meaning of the statement is : For every arbitary large $k$, there is an arithmetic progression of length $k$ producing only primes (I think this has been proven, but it is not known whether the statement remains true if the primes have to be consecutive)
$endgroup$
– Peter
Mar 18 '17 at 23:05






$begingroup$
Of course, no arithmetic progression can produce only primes. This is even true for polynomials with integer coefficients. The meaning of the statement is : For every arbitary large $k$, there is an arithmetic progression of length $k$ producing only primes (I think this has been proven, but it is not known whether the statement remains true if the primes have to be consecutive)
$endgroup$
– Peter
Mar 18 '17 at 23:05






1




1




$begingroup$
In the Wolfram article on PAP, if you follow the link in the second paragraph (mathworld.wolfram.com/k-TupleConjecture.html), that article, near the bottom, describes the special case, "prime patterns conjecture", mentioned in the PAP article. It goes on to say that there are arbitrarily long APs of primes. Note arbitrarily long is not the same as infinite. IMO the PAP article, is at best confusing, in talking about the "prime patterns conjecture".
$endgroup$
– Χpẘ
Mar 18 '17 at 23:42




$begingroup$
In the Wolfram article on PAP, if you follow the link in the second paragraph (mathworld.wolfram.com/k-TupleConjecture.html), that article, near the bottom, describes the special case, "prime patterns conjecture", mentioned in the PAP article. It goes on to say that there are arbitrarily long APs of primes. Note arbitrarily long is not the same as infinite. IMO the PAP article, is at best confusing, in talking about the "prime patterns conjecture".
$endgroup$
– Χpẘ
Mar 18 '17 at 23:42




3




3




$begingroup$
Indeed, the Wolfram article uses the exact phrase "infinitely long prime arithmetic progressions", which is not accurate: "arbitrarily long prime arithmetic progressions" is what is meant. So the OP's objection is quite valid!
$endgroup$
– Greg Martin
Mar 18 '17 at 23:43




$begingroup$
Indeed, the Wolfram article uses the exact phrase "infinitely long prime arithmetic progressions", which is not accurate: "arbitrarily long prime arithmetic progressions" is what is meant. So the OP's objection is quite valid!
$endgroup$
– Greg Martin
Mar 18 '17 at 23:43




1




1




$begingroup$
Minor correction: $a(1+n)$ should be $a(1+d)$.
$endgroup$
– hardmath
Mar 19 '17 at 0:14




$begingroup$
Minor correction: $a(1+n)$ should be $a(1+d)$.
$endgroup$
– hardmath
Mar 19 '17 at 0:14










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















0












$begingroup$

As others have pointed out in the comment section, there can be no arithmetic progression that produces only primes (see here for a quick explanation). So, as you rightly say, all infinite arithmetic progressions have at least one composite number.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2192873%2fquestion-about-the-k-tuples-conjecture%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    0












    $begingroup$

    As others have pointed out in the comment section, there can be no arithmetic progression that produces only primes (see here for a quick explanation). So, as you rightly say, all infinite arithmetic progressions have at least one composite number.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$


















      0












      $begingroup$

      As others have pointed out in the comment section, there can be no arithmetic progression that produces only primes (see here for a quick explanation). So, as you rightly say, all infinite arithmetic progressions have at least one composite number.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$
















        0












        0








        0





        $begingroup$

        As others have pointed out in the comment section, there can be no arithmetic progression that produces only primes (see here for a quick explanation). So, as you rightly say, all infinite arithmetic progressions have at least one composite number.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        As others have pointed out in the comment section, there can be no arithmetic progression that produces only primes (see here for a quick explanation). So, as you rightly say, all infinite arithmetic progressions have at least one composite number.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Dec 20 '18 at 11:30









        KlangenKlangen

        1,75811334




        1,75811334






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid …



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2192873%2fquestion-about-the-k-tuples-conjecture%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            -

            Popular posts from this blog

            Quarter-circle Tiles

            Image
            up vote 0 down vote favorite I have $99$ identical square tiles, each with a quarter-circle drawn on it like this: [asy] size(1.5cm); draw(Arc((2,0),1,90,180),red+1); draw((0,0)--(2,0)--(2,2)--(0,2)--(0,0)); [/asy] When I arrange the tiles in a $9times 11$ rectangular grid, each with a random orientation, what is the expected value of the number of full circles I form? I think this problem has to do with finding the chance any given 2x2 square has a circle, but I can't find it. expected-value share | cite | improve this question asked Nov 20 at 15:03 6minecraftninja 1 2
            Read more

            build a pushdown automaton that recognizes the reverse language of a given pushdown automaton?

            Image
            0 I think it's similiar to NFAs. I replace the finite states of the given automaton for start-states for my new automaton. I do it with $epsilon$ -transition from the start state to the actual finite states of the given automaton. The start state of the given automaton will be my accepting(finite) state of my new one. All transitions will be reversed of course to recognize the reversed word. But how do I have to change the stack of the pushdown automaton? That's tricky. formal-languages automata context-free-grammar share | cite | improve this question edited Nov 29 '18 at 14:20 joee
            Read more

            Mont Emei

            Image
            Mont Emei.mw-parser-output .entete.map{background-image:url("//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7a/Picto_infobox_map.png")} Vue du sommet Wanfo du mont Emei Géographie Altitude 3 099  m , Wanfo Coordonnées 29° 31′ 11″ nord, 103° 19′ 57″ est Administration Pays   Chine Province Sichuan Ville-préfecture Leshan Géolocalisation sur la carte : Sichuan Mont Emei Géolocalisation sur la carte : Chine Mont Emei modifier   Paysage panoramique du mont Emei, incluant le paysage panoramique du grand Bouddha de Leshan *   Patrimoine mondial de l'UNESCO Passerelle en bois sur le versant ouest Pays   Chine Subdivision Sichuan Type Mixte Critères (iv) (vi) (x) Superficie 15 400 ha Numéro d’identification 779 Zone géographique Asie et Pacifique  ** Année d’inscription 1996 (20 e session) * Descriptif officiel UNESCO ** Classification géog
            Read more