View Single Post
2019-04-15, 23:42   #38
wblipp

"William"
May 2003
New Haven

2×32×131 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by wblipp Ooops. This means at least one prime (p) exists beyond those in the list. But why must it be a twin prime?
Quote:
 Originally Posted by MathDoggy There is no such implication
Quote:
 Originally Posted by MathDoggy Should I quit to try to fix the proof? It is because nothing is working
Now would be a good time to step back and try to understand why nothing is working. You have successfully shown "there must be at least one prime outside of previous consideration" several times. But the thing you trying to prove requires showing that "there are two primes outside of previous consideration" and also "these two primes are very close together." You can adapt your methods to prove there are two primes, but nothing in your methods says anything about how close together they are.

This is a valid learning method - try to do something, see what's wrong, try to fix it, repeat. You need to get better at seeing what's wrong yourself.

If you were hoping to learn why the twin prime conjecture is hard, you are probably done or nearly so. At least until you learn some tools about closeness of primes.