anonymous
  • anonymous
t(1)=2 t(2)=3 t(3)=t(1)*t(2)+1 t(4)=t(1)*t(2)*t(3)+1 . . . t(n)=t(1)*t(2)*t(3)*...*t(n-1)+1 PROVE or DISPROVE that t(n) will surely be PRIME
Mathematics
  • Stacey Warren - Expert brainly.com
Hey! We 've verified this expert answer for you, click below to unlock the details :)
SOLVED
At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
jamiebookeater
  • jamiebookeater
I got my questions answered at brainly.com in under 10 minutes. Go to brainly.com now for free help!
TuringTest
  • TuringTest
This sounds like a very hard problem.
anonymous
  • anonymous
Maybe not....
anonymous
  • anonymous
I dont know..... But I think it will not be surely prime.

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.

More answers

anonymous
  • anonymous
If not, we just need a counterexample.
TuringTest
  • TuringTest
I doubt it is all primes as well.
UnkleRhaukus
  • UnkleRhaukus
remainder is gonna be one
klimenkov
  • klimenkov
Looks like an Euclid proof of the infinite number of prime numbers.
anonymous
  • anonymous
Euclid never said there was an infinity of primes (didn't believe in infinity)
swissgirl
  • swissgirl
t(5)=2*3*7*43+1=1807 1807/13=139
anonymous
  • anonymous
Euclid said that you could always construct another one out of a supposedly complete list.
UnkleRhaukus
  • UnkleRhaukus
that dosent make sense
klimenkov
  • klimenkov
There are infinitely many primes, as demonstrated by Euclid around 300 BC. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_number
anonymous
  • anonymous
True but he never said anything about infinity (Greeks weren't too keen on that idea)
klimenkov
  • klimenkov
You deepened into the history. But I spoke about the method.
anonymous
  • anonymous
The method, I agree, is very like the question.....
anonymous
  • anonymous
P_n = p1p2p3....+1
UnkleRhaukus
  • UnkleRhaukus
anonymous
  • anonymous
The "infinitely many" part got added later.....
anonymous
  • anonymous
Personally, I like "you can always get another one" better....
anonymous
  • anonymous
"Construct another one"
UnkleRhaukus
  • UnkleRhaukus
do you mean induction
anonymous
  • anonymous
No, it is an explicit construction...
anonymous
  • anonymous
You give me a list of primes and say "That's all there are" And I give you another one not in the list...

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.