Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.

Topic: sums of distinct primes redux
Replies: 7   Last Post: Sep 8, 2005 8:11 PM

 Search Thread: Advanced Search

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 Barry Schwarz Posts: 157 Registered: 12/6/04
Re: sums of distinct primes redux
Posted: Sep 3, 2005 2:30 PM
 Plain Text Reply

"Pubkeybreaker" <Robert_silverman@raytheon.com> writes:
> Eric Thurschwell wrote:
> > This is just a response to Dr. Derek Holt's post
> > (http://groups-beta.google.com/group/sci.math/msg/474ca1e6989a55d3?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&rnum=3)
> > at the old "sums of distinct primes" topic.

>
> A follow-on challenge.
>
> Prove or Disprove:
>
> Every sufficiently large integer is the sum of *consecutive* primes.

Find an integer k that is the sum of three consecutive primes, all
greater than 2. Call the three primes p1, p2, and p3. Consider k+1.

Obviously k+1 > p1+p2+p3. Equally obviously, k+1 is greater than the
sum of any three consecutive primes where the third is less than p3.

Since only odd numbers are prime, p2 >= p1+2 and p3 >= p2+2. For the
next prime after p3, call it p4, we know that p4 >= p3+2.

Substituting the above, we see that p2+p3+p4>= p1+2 + p2+2 + p3 +2 but
this latter expression is just k+6 and k+1 < k+6. Any sum of three
consecutive primes involving primes after p4 would be even larger.

Therefore, if k is the sum of three consecutive primes then k+1 cannot
be.

<<Remove the del for email>>

Date Subject Author
9/1/05 Ericthurs@aol.com
9/2/05 Pubkeybreaker
9/3/05 Phil Carmody
9/3/05 Barry Schwarz
9/3/05 Pubkeybreaker
9/3/05 quasi
9/5/05 Paul Pollack
9/8/05 Ericthurs@aol.com

© Drexel University 1994-2013. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.