Skip to main content
improved formatting
Source Link
Tony Huynh
  • 32.1k
  • 11
  • 112
  • 187

Yes, this is true. In 1952, Nagura proved that for $n \geq 25$, there is always a prime between $n$ and $(6/5)n$$\frac{6}{5} n$. Thus, let $p_k$ be a prime at least $25$. Then $p_k+p_{k+1} > 2p_k$. But by Nagura's result we have that $p_{k+2} \leq 36/25 p_k < 2p_k$$p_{k+2} \leq \frac{36}{25} p_k < 2p_k$. Finally, one can easily check by hand that the result holds for small primes.

Yes, this is true. In 1952, Nagura proved that for $n \geq 25$, there is always a prime between $n$ and $(6/5)n$. Thus, let $p_k$ be a prime at least $25$. Then $p_k+p_{k+1} > 2p_k$. But by Nagura's result we have that $p_{k+2} \leq 36/25 p_k < 2p_k$. Finally, one can easily check by hand that the result holds for small primes.

Yes, this is true. In 1952, Nagura proved that for $n \geq 25$, there is always a prime between $n$ and $\frac{6}{5} n$. Thus, let $p_k$ be a prime at least $25$. Then $p_k+p_{k+1} > 2p_k$. But by Nagura's result we have that $p_{k+2} \leq \frac{36}{25} p_k < 2p_k$. Finally, one can easily check by hand that the result holds for small primes.

added 20 characters in body
Source Link
Tony Huynh
  • 32.1k
  • 11
  • 112
  • 187

Yes, this is true. In 1952, Nagura proved that for $n \geq 25$, there is always a prime between $n$ and $(6/5)n$. Thus, let $p_k$ be a prime at least 25$25$. Then $p_k+p_{k+1} > 2p_k$. But by Nagura's result we have that $p_{k+2} \leq 36/25 p_k < 2p_k$. It is easy to verify Finally, one can easily check by hand that the conjectureresult holds for small values of $p$primes.

Yes, this is true. In 1952, Nagura proved that for $n \geq 25$, there is always a prime between $n$ and $(6/5)n$. Thus, let $p_k$ be a prime at least 25. Then $p_k+p_{k+1} > 2p_k$. But by Nagura's result we have that $p_{k+2} \leq 36/25 p_k < 2p_k$. It is easy to verify the conjecture for small values of $p$.

Yes, this is true. In 1952, Nagura proved that for $n \geq 25$, there is always a prime between $n$ and $(6/5)n$. Thus, let $p_k$ be a prime at least $25$. Then $p_k+p_{k+1} > 2p_k$. But by Nagura's result we have that $p_{k+2} \leq 36/25 p_k < 2p_k$. Finally, one can easily check by hand that the result holds for small primes.

Added a link to an open access version of Nagura's paper
Source Link
Tony Huynh
  • 32.1k
  • 11
  • 112
  • 187

Yes, this is true. In 1952, NaguraNagura proved that for $n \geq 25$, there is always a prime between $n$ and $(6/5)n$. Thus, let $p_k$ be a prime at least 25. Then $p_k+p_{k+1} > 2p_k$. But by Nagura's result we have that $p_{k+2} \leq 36/25 p_k < 2p_k$. It is easy to verify the conjecture for small values of $p$.

Yes, this is true. In 1952, Nagura proved that for $n \geq 25$, there is always a prime between $n$ and $(6/5)n$. Thus, let $p_k$ be a prime at least 25. Then $p_k+p_{k+1} > 2p_k$. But by Nagura's result we have that $p_{k+2} \leq 36/25 p_k < 2p_k$. It is easy to verify the conjecture for small values of $p$.

Yes, this is true. In 1952, Nagura proved that for $n \geq 25$, there is always a prime between $n$ and $(6/5)n$. Thus, let $p_k$ be a prime at least 25. Then $p_k+p_{k+1} > 2p_k$. But by Nagura's result we have that $p_{k+2} \leq 36/25 p_k < 2p_k$. It is easy to verify the conjecture for small values of $p$.

Source Link
Tony Huynh
  • 32.1k
  • 11
  • 112
  • 187
Loading