Re: Least primes in arithmetic progressions
- From: klewis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Keith A. Lewis)
- Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 18:17:23 +0000 (UTC)
Geevarghese Philip <gphilip.newsgroups@xxxxxxxxx> writes in article <pan.2005.12.14.03.12.01.749723@xxxxxxxxx> dated Wed, 14 Dec 2005 22:48:37 +0500:
>On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 09:55:33 +0200, Risto Kauppila wrote:
>
>> Let p be be a prime. By Dirichlet's theorem there exists
>> least positive integer n for which f(p) = np+1 is prime.
>
>How by Dirichlet's theorem? Does the same argument also stick for f(n) =
>np, which we know is never a prime?
Dirichlet's theorem states that the series a*n+b contains an infinite number
of primes, provided gcf(a,b)=1.
gcf(p,0)=p, so the case b=0 is excluded.
gcf(p,1)=1
--Keith Lewis klewis {at} mitre.org
The above may not (yet) represent the opinions of my employer.
.
- References:
- Least primes in arithmetic progressions
- From: Risto Kauppila
- Re: Least primes in arithmetic progressions
- From: Geevarghese Philip
- Least primes in arithmetic progressions
- Prev by Date: Re: Group Homomorphism
- Next by Date: Re: Proper classes and the non-finite
- Previous by thread: Re: Least primes in arithmetic progressions
- Next by thread: Re: Least primes in arithmetic progressions
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|