5
$\begingroup$

An integer $m$ is Fortunate if it can be written as $q-P$, where $P$ is a primorial and $q$ is the smallest prime greater than $P+1$. It is conjectured that Fortunate numbers are always prime.

It is easy to see that there are only finitely many possible primorials $P$ for which a given $m$ can be decomposed in the above manner (this is because $m$ must be greater than the largest prime dividing $P$).

QUESTION: Is the number of such representations of an integer $m$ uniformly bounded above?

$\endgroup$
5
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ What largest prime? Gerhard "Ask Me About System Design" Paseman, 2012.09.04 $\endgroup$ Sep 5, 2012 at 3:19
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ I think you probably meant to say "smallest prime greater than $P+1$." For anyone who, like me two minutes ago, doesn't know what a primorial is: that's a portmanteau of "prime" and "factorial", i.e., multiply the first n primes together to get the $n^{th}$ primorial. $\endgroup$
    – Todd Trimble
    Sep 5, 2012 at 3:23
  • $\begingroup$ oh....so some primes are unfortunate, so unfair @('_')@ $\endgroup$
    – Suvrit
    Sep 5, 2012 at 10:26
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the correction; I fixed the question so that it doesn't contradict Euclid. $\endgroup$
    – Jon Cohen
    Sep 6, 2012 at 15:36
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The Fortunate numbers are tabulated at oeis.org/A005235. The numbers are actually named after R F Fortune, who is credited with the conjecture that they are all prime. A number of references are given at the oeis page. 23 is the smallest "doubly Fortunate" number; 61, the smallest triply Fortunate. 2 and 11 are the smallest unFortunate primes. $\endgroup$ Sep 6, 2012 at 23:58

0

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.