How many primes will not be found from prime $p=a+b$ and prime producing formulae $a\cdot p+b$ and $b\cdot p+a$? An example for $11=2+9$ gives $2\cdot 11+9=31$ and $9\cdot 11+2=101$. Is there a maximum prime that will not be found? The larger the prime, the more numbers produced, $p-1$ of them; so it seems inevitable that all but a few primes will not be found. Do you agree?
2026-04-03 03:41:26.1775187686
For $a>0$ prime $p=a+b$ and $p\cdot a+b$ and $p\cdot b+a$ gives all primes
95 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in PRIME-NUMBERS
- New prime number
- Confirmation of Proof: $\forall n \in \mathbb{N}, \ \pi (n) \geqslant \frac{\log n}{2\log 2}$
- How do I prove this question involving primes?
- What exactly is the definition of Carmichael numbers?
- I'm having a problem interpreting and starting this problem with primes.
- Decimal expansion of $\frac{1}{p}$: what is its period?
- Multiplying prime numbers
- Find the number of relatively prime numbers from $10$ to $100$
- A congruence with the Euler's totient function and sum of divisors function
- Squares of two coprime numbers
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
If I understand what you're asking correctly, then the answer to your main question is almost definitely no, there is no maximum prime that will not be found. First, let me state a few things I am assuming here. First, the $a$ and $b$ are meant to be non-negative integers. Second, note that you don't need to check both $ap + b$ and $bp + a$ since if $p = a + b$, then $p = b + a$ also, so each check would be duplicated. As such, I will just only consider all possible $ap + b$. Replacing $b$ with $p - a$ gives
$$ap + \left(p - a\right) = \left(a + 1\right)p - \left(a + 1\right) + 1 \tag{1}\label{eq1}$$
Now, you are asking to check for $a$ going from $1$ to $p - 1$, inclusive. I will replace $a + 1$ with $c$, with it going from $2$ to $p$, inclusive, to get
$$cp - c + 1 = c\left(p - 1\right) + 1 \tag{2}\label{eq2}$$
Among the primes to check, consider the Sophie Germain primes, i.e., which are primes $q$ where $2q + 1$ is also a prime. Assume there is a $c \ge 2$ and $p$ which allows \eqref{eq2} to be equal to $2q + 1$. This then gives
$$2q + 1 = c\left(p - 1\right) + 1 \tag{3}\label{eq3}$$
which simplifies to
$$2q = c\left(p - 1\right) \tag{4}\label{eq4}$$
Now, if $p = 2$, then $2q = c$, but $2 \le c \le p$, so $c = 2$ is the only value, resulting in $q = 1$, which is not prime. For $p \gt 2$, $p$ is odd and so must be of the form $2n + 1$ for some positive integer $n$. Thus, $p - 1 = 2n$, with \eqref{eq4} now becoming
$$q = cn \tag{5}\label{eq5}$$
However, with $q$ being a prime, then $q = c$ and $n = 1$, or $q = n$ and $c = 1$. Since $c \ge 2$, as stated earlier, this requires that $c = q$ and $n = 1$. This means that just $p = 3$ can possibly work, giving the only Sophie Germain primes your algorithm creates being $2$, with $5 = 3 \times 1 + 2$, plus $3$, with $7 = 3 \times 2 + 1$. All other primes coming from Sophie Germain primes, starting with $5$ where $11 = 2 \times 5 + 1$ as you have noticed yourself, will not work!
It's an unproven conjecture that there are an infinite # of Sophie Germain primes. However, I believe it's likely true as it would be an very unusual property of primes, IMHO, for the set of these primes to be finite.
There also other types of primes which generally will not work. Consider, for example, where both $q$ and $4q + 1$ are primes. I'm not aware of any general name for these types of primes. Anyway, \eqref{eq5} then becomes
$$2q = cn \tag{6}\label{eq6}$$
As before, $q$ must divide $c$ or $n$. If it divides $c$, then $c = q$ and $n = 2$, which means $p = 5$, with the only $q$ which works being $3$, giving the prime to create being $13 = 4 \times 3 + 1$ and, from your algorithm, $13 = 2 \times 5 + 3$. If $q$ doesn't divide $c$, then it must divide $n$, so $q = n$ and $c = 2$. However, this means that $p = 2n + 1 = 2q + 1$. But this can't be true in general as it means that $q$, $2q + 1$ and $4q + 1$ must all be prime simultaneously. To see this, if $q$ is not $3$, then $q \equiv 1 \pmod 3$ (with $2q + 1 \equiv 0 \pmod 3$ in this case) or $q \equiv 2 \pmod 3$ (with $4q + 1 \equiv 0 \pmod 3$ in this other case). As such, only $q = 3$ works. There are also undoubtedly an infinite number of cases where both $q$ and $4q + 1$ are prime, starting with $7$ and $29$, so this is another set of values which won't work for you.
Consider more generally where $q$ and $2dq + 1$ are prime, for some fixed integer $d \gt 2$. Using analysis similar to what I've done above will result in at least relatively stringent requirements (especially for smaller $d$) which may allow many values to work, but I suspect there will also be quite a few cases that don't, especially for larger $q$. As such, unfortunately, it seems there are a quite few other types of primes, other than just those associated with Sophie Germain ones, that won't work with your algorithm.