I have read that there are an infinite number of Ns where N-1 and N+1 are both prime, but I never made the connection between that and this -- till now. Why they couldn't just say that in the first place...
As I said in the original post, this was a half remembered impression I picked up from reading something that I readily admit to not fully understanding. {sigh}
From my perspective, this make the Prime Number Theorum about as useful as knowing that you can cause perl to dump core in 6 characters. It's statable and provably true (so I read), but beyond that it's nothing more than an object of curiosity.
I realise my problem is my own ignorance, but I wish these darn things carried a Management Summary and a ROI value that one could assess before getting drawn in to actually trying to understand them:)
In reply to Re: Re^4: Finding the next larger prime. (conclusions)
by BrowserUk
in thread Finding the next larger prime.
by BrowserUk
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |