What is the deal with this theorem? does anyone have any attempted

  • Thread starter Thread starter mt8891
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Theorem
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the complexities surrounding mathematical conjectures, particularly the binary and ternary versions of Goldbach's conjecture and twin primes. It highlights the challenges in proving these conjectures, emphasizing that while simple statements often have intricate proofs, many conjectures in graph theory generated by Ronald Graham's program, Graffiti, are deemed uninteresting despite their complexity. The conversation also touches on the limitations of current tools in Additive Prime Number Theory, suggesting that conjectures involving pairs of primes are significantly harder to resolve than those involving single primes.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Goldbach's conjecture and twin primes
  • Familiarity with Additive Prime Number Theory
  • Knowledge of graph theory and conjecture generation
  • Basic mathematical proof techniques
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the latest developments in Goldbach's conjecture proofs
  • Explore Ronald Graham's Graffiti program and its contributions to graph theory
  • Study the principles of Additive Prime Number Theory
  • Investigate other notable unsolved problems in mathematics involving pairs of numbers
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of number theory, and anyone interested in the complexities of mathematical conjectures and proofs.

mt8891
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
what is the deal with this theorem?

does anyone have any attempted proofs?

I am just curious as to what the big deal is with this proof since it seems so (damn) "simple" (recognizable).
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org


It's common for simple statements to have complex proofs. There has been much progress on the ternary version (a proof may be near) but very little on the binary version.
 


A few general comments:

It is easy, even with little background, to create conjectures. Many of these can either be settled easily or they are considered uninteresting by the culture of mathematics. It is much harder to find a conjecture that is hard to prove and considered interesting by that culture. Ronald Graham and his group have written a program called Graffiti that comes up with conjectures in graph theory, almost all of which are easy to state, almost certainly true and seem far beyond anyone's ability to settle, but thus far with few exceptions the culture seems to consider these to be uninteresting.

Problems that involve addition and primes seem to often be harder to settle. There is a field called Additive Prime Number Theory, but it seems that the tools we have to settle questions involving addition and primes are fewer and weaker.

If you have to reach into a pot and pluck out one prime that satisfies a condition then the primes seem "dense enough" that many conjectures are reasonably easy to determine true or false, with some exceptions. But if you have to reach into the pot and pluck out two numbers at the same time that together satisfy some condition then these seem to be not "dense enough" to be able to settle conjectures as easily, and not so sparce that it is easy to settle the question either.

Both Goldbach and twin primes involve pairs of numbers and the subject of primes and addition. Both are difficult problems that have resisted the best. I think I remember looking at a list of open questions years ago and recognized that a number of them involved pairs of numbers and primes. I don't remember any other example, but I would be interested in seeing any other examples or whether folks here could come up with new problems that fit this description.

Since you specifically asked what the big deal was with this problem, someone writing about the Clay math prizes perhaps a decade ago mentioned that there are lots of math problems that are simple to state and hard to prove, but only a select category of math problems seems to attract the attention of amateurs, the rest are ignored by amateurs.

And finally I recall someone writing about music. They said that hundreds of years after an individual is dead almost all of the music of that time has been completely and totally forgotten, only a tiny fraction that escaped accidental destruction or being discarded by the cultures of the following centuries remains.

So perhaps the reason we remember Goldbach's conjecture today is at least partly influenced by all these components.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K