Official 'exchange of inanities' thread [Was: mm127 is prime, cuz I say so]

[kalikidoom]

...(2^(2^(2^n-1)-1)-1)...

I mean... isn't that at least a proof that there's an infinate amout of them?

Try it with how meny primes you like... and with how meny 2^....-1 you like... it always works

[LaurV]

Originally Posted by kalikidoom

...(2^(2^(2^n-1)-1)-1)...

I mean... isn't that at least a proof that there's an infinate amout of them?

Try it with how meny primes you like... and with how meny 2^....-1 you like... it always works

That is false. For n=4, all are composite. Also for n=11, all are composite.

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by kalikidoom

...(2^(2^(2^n-1)-1)-1)...

I mean... isn't that at least a proof that there's an infinate amout of them?

I see a sequence of numbers. I see no mathematical argument at all that suggests
every number in the sequence is prime. You have a strange notion about what
constitutes a proof.

Try it with how meny primes you like... and with how meny 2^....-1 you like... it always works

"It always works". Is this your proof? A simple assertion?

I suggest that you think about what you wrote.

For example, please prove to us that 2^(2^127-1) - 1 is prime.

[retina]

Originally Posted by kalikidoom

<blah>... it always works

For various values of "works".

[science_man_88]

Originally Posted by kalikidoom

...(2^(2^(2^n-1)-1)-1)...

I mean... isn't that at least a proof that there's an infinate amout of them?

Try it with how meny primes you like... and with how meny 2^....-1 you like... it always works

1) n must be prime for 2^n-1 to be prime
2) by that same logic m=2^n-1 must be prime for 2^m-1= 2^(2^n-1)-1 to have a chance at being prime.
3) as LaurV pointed out not all n that are prime will allow 2^n-1 to be prime.

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by LaurV

That is false. For n=4, all are composite. Also for n=11, all are composite.

I expect that the OP intended for n = 2.

However, I'd still like an answer to my question as to why the OP thinks that presenting a
sequence of numbers is in any way a "proof". There were no mathematical statements
asserting that some (set of) condition(s) is true, nor were there any logical statements.
It was just a list of numbers. How can this be a proof?

[alpertron]

Well, the original poster said:

Originally Posted by kalikidoom

...(2^(2^(2^n-1)-1)-1)...

I mean... isn't that at least a proof that there's an infinate amout of them?

He didn't say that he has a proof.

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by alpertron

Well, the original poster said:

He didn't say that he has a proof.

He suggested that a sequence of numbers constituted a proof.
It is hard to correct someone's misconceptions without knowing how and
why they believe what they believe. A simple statement that what was
posted is not a proof says very little./// We need to know why the OP thought
that simply presenting a sequence of numbers might be a proof.

[science_man_88]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

He suggested that a sequence of numbers constituted a proof.
It is hard to correct someone's misconceptions without knowing how and
why they believe what they believe. A simple statement that what was
posted is not a proof says very little./// We need to know why the OP thought
that simply presenting a sequence of numbers might be a proof.

one thought I had is that they might think that because you can infinitely add to the representation that it represents and infinite amount of numbers and might intersect the primes infinitely often.

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by science_man_88

one thought I had is that they might think that because you can infinitely add to the representation that it represents and infinite amount of numbers and might intersect the primes infinitely often.

Gibberish from someone who hasn't yet passed first year algebra.

[science_man_88]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

Gibberish from someone who hasn't yet passed first year algebra.

I didn't say it was mathematically sound, I was trying to think like the OP might be thinking. Yet assumes I plan on going back to school again.