Bunyakowsky's conjecture is proven? [closed]
Here is the preprint:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311081099_Proof_of_Bunyakovsky's_conjecture
And there he is asking for the verification of proof:
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/vixra/proof-of-bunyakovsky-s-conjecture-t864.html
Are there any chances for it been true?
(I'm trying to expand some parts at the moment, such as proof for infiniteness of quantity of primorial or factorial numbers (n# - 1 or n! - 1) and useful primality tests for these numbers).
prime-numbers
asked Jan 4 at 18:14
TetramurTetramur
42
New contributor
Tetramur is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
closed as off-topic by Will Jagy, Antonios-Alexandros Robotis, Lord Shark the Unknown, Shaun, Alex R. Jan 4 at 18:33
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question is not about mathematics, within the scope defined in the help center." – Will Jagy, Antonios-Alexandros Robotis, Shaun, Alex R.
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
add a comment |
Here is the preprint:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311081099_Proof_of_Bunyakovsky's_conjecture
And there he is asking for the verification of proof:
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/vixra/proof-of-bunyakovsky-s-conjecture-t864.html
Are there any chances for it been true?
(I'm trying to expand some parts at the moment, such as proof for infiniteness of quantity of primorial or factorial numbers (n# - 1 or n! - 1) and useful primality tests for these numbers).
prime-numbers
asked Jan 4 at 18:14
TetramurTetramur
42
New contributor
Tetramur is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
closed as off-topic by Will Jagy, Antonios-Alexandros Robotis, Lord Shark the Unknown, Shaun, Alex R. Jan 4 at 18:33
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question is not about mathematics, within the scope defined in the help center." – Will Jagy, Antonios-Alexandros Robotis, Shaun, Alex R.
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
2
An elementary proof of Bunyakowsky's conjecture is unlikely. Specially if it also proves the $n^2 + 1$ conjecture, the twin primes conjecture and Goldbach's conjecture. All this in 10 pages!
– lhf
Jan 4 at 18:21
1
As this was first published on vixra.org (according to the second link), and given the content of the paper, the chance that this paper is correct is on par with spontaneously combusting in your chair.
– Alex R.
Jan 4 at 18:33
Just for curiousity : Is Goldbach's conjecture a consequence of the Bunyakovsky-conjecture ?
– Peter
Jan 5 at 9:52
Useful special primality tests for n#-1 and n!-1 , exploiting the special form like in the case of the Mersenne-numbers, are extremely unlikely to exist. Searching for such tests is almost surely wasting time.
– Peter
Jan 5 at 9:57
Considering that the Bunyakovsky conjecture implies some famous open problems, chances that it can be proven without "big guns" are virtually zero. I would consider even the chance that Bunyakovsky conjecture will be solved at all very very low.
– Peter
Jan 5 at 10:47
add a comment |
Here is the preprint:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311081099_Proof_of_Bunyakovsky's_conjecture
And there he is asking for the verification of proof:
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/vixra/proof-of-bunyakovsky-s-conjecture-t864.html
Are there any chances for it been true?
(I'm trying to expand some parts at the moment, such as proof for infiniteness of quantity of primorial or factorial numbers (n# - 1 or n! - 1) and useful primality tests for these numbers).
prime-numbers
asked Jan 4 at 18:14
TetramurTetramur
42
New contributor
Tetramur is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Here is the preprint:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311081099_Proof_of_Bunyakovsky's_conjecture
And there he is asking for the verification of proof:
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/vixra/proof-of-bunyakovsky-s-conjecture-t864.html
Are there any chances for it been true?
(I'm trying to expand some parts at the moment, such as proof for infiniteness of quantity of primorial or factorial numbers (n# - 1 or n! - 1) and useful primality tests for these numbers).
prime-numbers
prime-numbers
asked Jan 4 at 18:14
TetramurTetramur
42
New contributor
Tetramur is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked Jan 4 at 18:14
TetramurTetramur
42
New contributor
Tetramur is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked Jan 4 at 18:14
TetramurTetramur
42
New contributor
Tetramur is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked Jan 4 at 18:14
TetramurTetramur
42
asked Jan 4 at 18:14
TetramurTetramur
42
42
New contributor
Tetramur is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Tetramur is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Tetramur is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
closed as off-topic by Will Jagy, Antonios-Alexandros Robotis, Lord Shark the Unknown, Shaun, Alex R. Jan 4 at 18:33
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question is not about mathematics, within the scope defined in the help center." – Will Jagy, Antonios-Alexandros Robotis, Shaun, Alex R.
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
closed as off-topic by Will Jagy, Antonios-Alexandros Robotis, Lord Shark the Unknown, Shaun, Alex R. Jan 4 at 18:33
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question is not about mathematics, within the scope defined in the help center." – Will Jagy, Antonios-Alexandros Robotis, Shaun, Alex R.
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
2
An elementary proof of Bunyakowsky's conjecture is unlikely. Specially if it also proves the $n^2 + 1$ conjecture, the twin primes conjecture and Goldbach's conjecture. All this in 10 pages!
– lhf
Jan 4 at 18:21
1
As this was first published on vixra.org (according to the second link), and given the content of the paper, the chance that this paper is correct is on par with spontaneously combusting in your chair.
– Alex R.
Jan 4 at 18:33
Just for curiousity : Is Goldbach's conjecture a consequence of the Bunyakovsky-conjecture ?
– Peter
Jan 5 at 9:52
Useful special primality tests for n#-1 and n!-1 , exploiting the special form like in the case of the Mersenne-numbers, are extremely unlikely to exist. Searching for such tests is almost surely wasting time.
– Peter
Jan 5 at 9:57
Considering that the Bunyakovsky conjecture implies some famous open problems, chances that it can be proven without "big guns" are virtually zero. I would consider even the chance that Bunyakovsky conjecture will be solved at all very very low.
– Peter
Jan 5 at 10:47
add a comment |
2
An elementary proof of Bunyakowsky's conjecture is unlikely. Specially if it also proves the $n^2 + 1$ conjecture, the twin primes conjecture and Goldbach's conjecture. All this in 10 pages!
– lhf
Jan 4 at 18:21
1
As this was first published on vixra.org (according to the second link), and given the content of the paper, the chance that this paper is correct is on par with spontaneously combusting in your chair.
– Alex R.
Jan 4 at 18:33
Just for curiousity : Is Goldbach's conjecture a consequence of the Bunyakovsky-conjecture ?
– Peter
Jan 5 at 9:52
Useful special primality tests for n#-1 and n!-1 , exploiting the special form like in the case of the Mersenne-numbers, are extremely unlikely to exist. Searching for such tests is almost surely wasting time.
– Peter
Jan 5 at 9:57
Considering that the Bunyakovsky conjecture implies some famous open problems, chances that it can be proven without "big guns" are virtually zero. I would consider even the chance that Bunyakovsky conjecture will be solved at all very very low.
– Peter
Jan 5 at 10:47
2
2
An elementary proof of Bunyakowsky's conjecture is unlikely. Specially if it also proves the $n^2 + 1$ conjecture, the twin primes conjecture and Goldbach's conjecture. All this in 10 pages!
– lhf
Jan 4 at 18:21
An elementary proof of Bunyakowsky's conjecture is unlikely. Specially if it also proves the $n^2 + 1$ conjecture, the twin primes conjecture and Goldbach's conjecture. All this in 10 pages!
– lhf
Jan 4 at 18:21
1
1
As this was first published on vixra.org (according to the second link), and given the content of the paper, the chance that this paper is correct is on par with spontaneously combusting in your chair.
– Alex R.
Jan 4 at 18:33
As this was first published on vixra.org (according to the second link), and given the content of the paper, the chance that this paper is correct is on par with spontaneously combusting in your chair.
– Alex R.
Jan 4 at 18:33
Just for curiousity : Is Goldbach's conjecture a consequence of the Bunyakovsky-conjecture ?
– Peter
Jan 5 at 9:52
Just for curiousity : Is Goldbach's conjecture a consequence of the Bunyakovsky-conjecture ?
– Peter
Jan 5 at 9:52
Useful special primality tests for n#-1 and n!-1 , exploiting the special form like in the case of the Mersenne-numbers, are extremely unlikely to exist. Searching for such tests is almost surely wasting time.
– Peter
Jan 5 at 9:57
Useful special primality tests for n#-1 and n!-1 , exploiting the special form like in the case of the Mersenne-numbers, are extremely unlikely to exist. Searching for such tests is almost surely wasting time.
– Peter
Jan 5 at 9:57
Considering that the Bunyakovsky conjecture implies some famous open problems, chances that it can be proven without "big guns" are virtually zero. I would consider even the chance that Bunyakovsky conjecture will be solved at all very very low.
– Peter
Jan 5 at 10:47
Considering that the Bunyakovsky conjecture implies some famous open problems, chances that it can be proven without "big guns" are virtually zero. I would consider even the chance that Bunyakovsky conjecture will be solved at all very very low.
– Peter
Jan 5 at 10:47
add a comment |
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
2
An elementary proof of Bunyakowsky's conjecture is unlikely. Specially if it also proves the $n^2 + 1$ conjecture, the twin primes conjecture and Goldbach's conjecture. All this in 10 pages!
– lhf
Jan 4 at 18:21
1
As this was first published on vixra.org (according to the second link), and given the content of the paper, the chance that this paper is correct is on par with spontaneously combusting in your chair.
– Alex R.
Jan 4 at 18:33
Just for curiousity : Is Goldbach's conjecture a consequence of the Bunyakovsky-conjecture ?
– Peter
Jan 5 at 9:52
Useful special primality tests for n#-1 and n!-1 , exploiting the special form like in the case of the Mersenne-numbers, are extremely unlikely to exist. Searching for such tests is almost surely wasting time.
– Peter
Jan 5 at 9:57
Considering that the Bunyakovsky conjecture implies some famous open problems, chances that it can be proven without "big guns" are virtually zero. I would consider even the chance that Bunyakovsky conjecture will be solved at all very very low.
– Peter
Jan 5 at 10:47