let’s look at the x^2+x bit first.

Take the example of when

x=1 –> x^2+x = 2

when

x = 2 –> x^2+x = 6.

when

x= 3 –> x^2+x = 12 ….

if k = 41 then x^2+x+k between x= 0 and x= 3 gives 41,43,47,53.

the gap grows by 2 each time.

To get the first 2 prime results (41,43) you have to start at the smaller value of a twin prime.

The twin primes in this case are 41,43.

This is the already mentioned famous Euler polynomial.

So what if you start at k = 43 and work the other way? i.e. k- x^2+x.

You can imagine an axis of symmetry at 42

Now the sequence grows back towards the negative numbers.

43, 41, 37, 31, 23, 13, 1, -13, -29, -47, -67, -89,-113,-139 ………

Okay so by ** convention 1 **isn’t a prime and there are lots of clever mathematicians who can offer robust reasons why it shouldn’t be. Personally I think it is a prime, if for no other reason than when you look at sequences such as this it saves the day more often than not.

when k = 17 you also get the same effect

17,19,23,29,37,47,59,73 …… when x^2+x+17 ….

and

19,17,13,7,-1,-11,-23,-37,-53,-71,-91 😦 … when 19-x^2+x) .. I said in an earlier blog that I hate 91 .. here’s just one reason why 😉

I call this the reflection conjecture … just because it has a ring to it … :))

What’s worthy of note is that when x^2+x+29 is used (twin primes now being 29,31) … the sequence runs aground by the second term .. 29,31,35 …

and when you do the 31-x^2+x you get no further

31,29,25 ..

so all twim primes of this type … the next being 59,61 are not good candidates for k values.

the (71,73) twin pair do better as 73-x^2+x than x^2+x+71 …

73,71,67,61,53,43,31,17,1,-17,-37,-59,-83 …..

What I’m getting at in this blog .. is that when seeking sequences work the prime numbers from right to left as well as left to right. You’ll be pleasantly surprised at how often the sequences line up.

BP 05/08/2012

## Leave a Reply