CURED - 2022-07-31

« first day (3853 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (938 days later) »

Arctic Char

06:16

D1, D2, D3, D4

D5, D6, D7, D8

Arctic Char

06:34

D10, D11, D12

Peter

06:53

Peter

07:23

2 hours later…

Peter

09:57

Why has this post received so many upvotes ?

even this answer received an upvote !

4 hours later…

Bill Dubuque

14:38

@Peter Likely because it was a Hot Network Question for 10.5 hrs till removed by Asaf. So - as usual - the votes are highly skewed by drive-by rubbernecking votes. The Mma code-only answer still needs a couple DV's to convert it to a comment.

Bill Dubuque

14:59

Btw, the OP has mentioned religious numerology (Quran) at least 3 times (in the question and in comments), so the question could be viewed as religious numerological spam. It can be rephrased without any mention of religion. What do people think about editing to remove such? Any idea if the community would the community support that?

^^^ also asked in mod's office if they would support such an edit.

Peter

15:19

this seems to be a trial to prove the twin prime conjecture (at least a comment indicates it)

Feeds

-1

Q: Can we simplify a formula that counts twin primes in the interval $[a,b]$. Can we just do $[0, b]$ instead?

Background on formula for counting twin primes. I'm wondering if we can just "drop the $a$-involved term", since the summation literally counts the number of $n \in [a,b]$ such that $n \pm 1 \neq 0 \pmod {p_i}$ ("or" logic here) for all $i = 1..n$. Therefore, I think counting the $b$-involved ter...

Jyrki Lahtonen

16:26

@BillDubuque In principle I support the idea of editing out such religious references. IIRC people posting Bible Codes and such to sci.math got a cold reception (within the limitations of the tools of the day). It may lead to an edit war though. Is there some interesting math in there?

Ok, found the links Peter's message.