Talk:Brun's theorem

Proposed merger

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Agreement for merge. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 18:01, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

---

There's a significant overlap between Brun's theorem and Brun's constant. Richard Pinch (talk) 20:46, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Merge After you have read Brun's theorem, Brun's constant boils down to a sentence or two: Brun's constant is hard to estimate, and some people have calculated a lower bound of NNNNNNNNNNN. --Uncia (talk) 21:24, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

merge seems an easy call. Jason Quinn (talk) 20:13, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

I think it is ok to merge, but please make a redirect from constant to this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.245.20.61 (talk) 04:02, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proof

Can someone add a basic description of the proof, or a link to the proof? It's the first thing I was looking for, but I can't find it anywhere that isn't behind a paywall. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.165.127.173 (talk) 00:37, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

pi_2(x)

This function is not defined in the article. 137.226.198.75 (talk) 09:29, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it is.

• Let $\pi _{2}(x)$ denote the number of primes p ≤ x for which p + 2 is also prime ....

— Arthur Rubin (talk) 02:02, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Rationality

Actually, if the sum of the reciprocals is rational, couldn't there still be an infinite number of twin primes, as there are an infinite number of powers of two, even though the sum of their reciprocals is rational, namely 1 or two, depending on if you count 2⁰. But if the sum is irrational, then certainly there must be an infinite number of twin primes, as you cannot add together a finite number of rational numbers and arrive at an irrational number (Q is closed under addition). Captain Gamma (talk) 00:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Good point. I have asked the respected editor who added it. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:32, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Ok, yes, I agree. If there are infinitely many, then there is no reason to expect their sum to converge to an irrational number. —David Eppstein (talk) 03:23, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Brun's theorem. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110109082911/http://www.ift.uni.wroc.pl:80/%7Emwolf/ to http://www.ift.uni.wroc.pl/~mwolf/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:23, 9 November 2016 (UTC)