Re: Prime numbers problem
From: Arturo Magidin (magidin_at_math.berkeley.edu)
Date: 12/13/04
- Next message: Charlie-Boo: "Re: The consise Cantor's proof ?"
- Previous message: Arturo Magidin: "Re: Golf competition"
- In reply to: Tapio: "Re: Prime numbers problem"
- Next in thread: Arturo Magidin: "Re: Prime numbers problem"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 17:55:23 +0000 (UTC)
In article <6Akvd.325$wc1.317@read3.inet.fi>, Tapio <hurmecom@dlc.fi> wrote:
>
>"Waldek" <waldek69@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:cpkj9s$d5a$1@news2.ipartners.pl...
>>
>> "When I divide any prime number by 30, the remainder is always prime
>> number."
>
>False for primes smaller than 30.
Huh? If p is a prime and p<30, then the remainder is p, which is a prime.
--
======================================================================
"It's not denial. I'm just very selective about
what I accept as reality."
--- Calvin ("Calvin and Hobbes")
======================================================================
Arturo Magidin
magidin@math.berkeley.edu
- Next message: Charlie-Boo: "Re: The consise Cantor's proof ?"
- Previous message: Arturo Magidin: "Re: Golf competition"
- In reply to: Tapio: "Re: Prime numbers problem"
- Next in thread: Arturo Magidin: "Re: Prime numbers problem"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|