Timeline for Is there any progress toward solving Gilbreath's conjecture?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S Aug 16, 2017 at 7:18 | history | suggested | Martin Sleziak | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added doi and MathSciNet links (the question has been bumped anyway by a new answer)
|
| Aug 16, 2017 at 6:49 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Aug 16, 2017 at 7:18 | |||||
| Aug 9, 2010 at 3:46 | comment | added | Charles | They're still rare in the sense that A080839 is small compared to A136465, though. | |
| Aug 6, 2010 at 5:22 | comment | added | tdnoe | The question of how many increasing sequences of integers have the Gilbreath property is answered in oeis.org/classic/A080839. It doesn't make the primes seem that special. | |
| Aug 5, 2010 at 23:12 | comment | added | Gerry Myerson | The Odlyzko paper is Math. Comp. 61 (1993) 373-380, MR 93k:11119. The conjecture is problem A10 in Guy, Unsolved Problems In Number Theory. In 1878, long before Gilbreath made the conjecture (1958, unpublished), Proth claimed to have proved it - Guy gives the bibliographic details. Odlyzko discusses the suggestion that the result is true for (quoting Guy) any sequence consisting of 2 and odd numbers, which doesn't increase too fast, or have too large gaps. Math Reviews conatins no citations of Odlyzko's paper. | |
| Aug 5, 2010 at 22:10 | comment | added | Andy Putman | That's a great quote! | |
| Aug 5, 2010 at 21:34 | history | answered | Gjergji Zaimi | CC BY-SA 2.5 |