Talk:Cousin primes: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
No edit summary |
(added concerns about the wording of this (draft) task.) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== similar to twin primes == |
|||
I know that this task is similar to Twin primes one, but differ from that. (CalmoSoft) |
I know that this task is similar to Twin primes one, but differ from that. (CalmoSoft) |
||
<br>See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_prime |
<br>See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_prime |
||
== task needs clarification == |
|||
This task defined cousin primes, but '''7''' and '''11''' are both |
|||
cousin primes, and there are two cousin primes in this sentence. |
|||
One cousin ''pair'' is shown, but '''two''' cousin primes. |
|||
Similarly, the list of cousin primes shown in the first line of the output section of |
|||
the '''Ring''' computer language shows: |
|||
(3, 7) (7, 11) (13, 17) (19, 23) (37, 41) |
|||
(I added extra blanks) which shows '''ten''' cousin prime numbers, but one cousin prime ('''7''') is shown |
|||
duplicated. So far, two computer programming language outputs are showing ''cousin prime pairs'', and this task is asking for ''cousin primes'', not the number of ''cousin prime pairs''. I have no qualms of showing the cousin primes in pairs, but it should be very clear ''what'' we are counting (regardless of how they are shown, paired or not paired). |
|||
I think this task, in addition to showing the cousin primes in whatever manner is chosen, also include as a summary, the ''number'' of (unique) cousin primes found, whether or not a count of cousin prime pairs is also shown. |
|||
Maybe this task should also specify if the cousin primes are to be listed in pairs (or not), dealer's choice? I prefer a simple list of cousin primes (not shown in pairs, as it looks simpler and less cluttered, but it's only an opinion. |
|||
This also raises the question (again), if we are to (for instance) list all cousin primes less than 100, should '''97''' be shown? Of course it should, because it ''is'' a cousin prime; but its (higher) cousin prime is out of range. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 18:13, 18 March 2021 (UTC) |