January 3rd, 2019, 04:22 AM  #31  
Senior Member Joined: Oct 2009 Posts: 770 Thanks: 276  Quote:
But there are an infinite number of primes. So how do you know that there are finitely many primes that eliminate all pairs? And, I know we're stupid people. But if you give somebody a proof to get feedback on, and they ask a question, don't reply with saying it's obvious five times. It's just insulting. I don't care, but journals will. Last edited by Micrm@ss; January 3rd, 2019 at 04:24 AM.  
January 3rd, 2019, 06:28 AM  #32  
Senior Member Joined: May 2016 From: USA Posts: 1,310 Thanks: 551  Quote:
A cannot lift a beam. B cannot lift the same beam. A and B together cannot lift the same beam. A, B, and C together can lift that beam. That does not prove that C alone can lift the beam. A child can see the flaw in that argument. So you have not established that if the twin primes conjecture is false, there is a single eliminating prime. Prove it.  
January 3rd, 2019, 06:37 AM  #33  
Senior Member Joined: Oct 2009 Posts: 770 Thanks: 276  Quote:
What he claims in his original post though, is that there is a single prime eliminating all the remaining twin primes ahead. This would be true if there were only 5 primes. However, this seems not what he needs later in the proof. Since later he does need one prime that eliminates EVERY twin prime, not just the remaining ones. So you're right, if he succeeds in proving his original claim that there is one prime that eliminates the remaining ones, that would not be enough.  
January 3rd, 2019, 06:51 AM  #34  
Senior Member Joined: May 2016 From: USA Posts: 1,310 Thanks: 551  Quote:
Of course even if he can prove that stronger conditional proposition, which he has not, this does not address the much more plausible hypothesis that set E is infinite. If there are a finite number of twin primes, then the number of pairs (6n  1 and 6n + 1) remaining are infinite, and there are an infinite number of primes that potentially can do the necessary eliminating. And in an infinite list, there is no last element.  
January 3rd, 2019, 07:41 AM  #35 
Banned Camp Joined: Aug 2010 Posts: 170 Thanks: 4 
I can't see what more I can say to make you see things from what to me is a straight forward point of view. Maybe I will try again. 5, for instance, eliminates all its infinite number of multiples from the infinite number line. Why then can you not all see that if the twin prime conjecture is false then it takes just one prime to eliminate all the uneliminated, infinite number of 6n1 and 6n+1 pairs? I repeat again that it will be absurd to say more than 1 prime is required to do this i.e. one might just as well make an absurd comment by saying that more than one prime is required to eliminate all the infinite number of multiples of 5 when it is clear that one prime,5, can do this.

January 3rd, 2019, 08:29 AM  #36 
Global Moderator Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 20,469 Thanks: 2038 
If it's so straightforward, you should be able to rewrite your proof without using words such as "obvious" and "absurd", and as a series of elementary steps, each of which is a direct consequence of a stated rule (or stated rules) of arithmetic or algebra.

January 3rd, 2019, 08:32 AM  #37  
Senior Member Joined: Jun 2014 From: USA Posts: 505 Thanks: 39  Quote:
Last edited by AplanisTophet; January 3rd, 2019 at 08:35 AM.  
January 3rd, 2019, 08:40 AM  #38 
Global Moderator Joined: Oct 2008 From: London, Ontario, Canada  The Forest City Posts: 7,929 Thanks: 1124 Math Focus: Elementary mathematics and beyond 
This seems to be an ineffective takeoff on Zhang's method, which proved there are an infinite number of prime pairs with a prime gap around some number near 70 million.

January 3rd, 2019, 09:06 AM  #39  
Math Team Joined: May 2013 From: The Astral plane Posts: 2,138 Thanks: 872 Math Focus: Wibbly wobbly timeywimey stuff.  Quote:
Your statement here, once again, does not involve a proof. You are getting exasperated with us. That's a good thing! Provide a proof that doesn't rely on "hand waving" and you'll convince us that we've been wrong about this the whole time. Dan  
January 3rd, 2019, 09:22 AM  #40  
Senior Member Joined: Jun 2014 From: USA Posts: 505 Thanks: 39  Quote:
Quote:
Yes, E is infinite. So now MrAwojobi, you have to prove that there is an infinite set E of eliminating primes that eliminates all potential twin primes greater than $p$ (where $p$ is the greatest prime that is also a twin prime). Under your method, that is a really tall order. Good luck!  

Tags 
conjecture, prime, proof, twin 
Thread Tools  
Display Modes  

Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Twin prime conjecture proof  MrAwojobi  Number Theory  20  October 31st, 2018 01:06 AM 
The proof of the Twin Primes conjecture  Al78Ex53:Fe#!D%03  Number Theory  3  September 30th, 2013 04:52 PM 
Twin Prime Conjecture  Macky  Number Theory  8  September 28th, 2010 11:39 AM 
Proof of the Twin Prime Conjecture  MrAwojobi  Number Theory  51  August 9th, 2010 11:09 AM 
Twin prime conjecture(help)  ogajajames  Number Theory  4  April 26th, 2010 05:51 AM 