> On Jun 25, 2:47 pm, Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > It's not up to me, I am stating factual discovery. > Or at least is is > > my intent. I cannot see how multiplying to even > numbers with a > > difference of two will allow for a composite square > with a identical > > prime factors. > > > > Do you? > > > > I am asking. I have not included it in my > conjecture because to tell > > you the truth I simply do not know the answer. Do > you? What are the > > implications either way? > > > > Thank you, > > > > Martin Musatov > > when you assert "this number is prime, or composite > with at least two > prime factors", well ALL composites have at least two > prime factors, > that's what composite means, unless you require that > the prime factors > be distinct. so you are saying "this number is prime > or composite", > which is of course trivially true. > > but if you require at least two distinct primes, you > are then > asserting for even N, (N*N)(N*N +2) - 1 is not a > prime squared. >
Yes, I am asserting it will not be a prime squared.