Talk:Triplet of three numbers: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
No edit summary |
m (→Clarification please: Smiley and apology for failing to add signature earlier.) |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
: Wait till you see the triplets of seven numbers task, now that promises to be difficult... --[[User:Petelomax|Pete Lomax]] ([[User talk:Petelomax|talk]]) 21:33, 18 May 2021 (UTC) |
: Wait till you see the triplets of seven numbers task, now that promises to be difficult... --[[User:Petelomax|Pete Lomax]] ([[User talk:Petelomax|talk]]) 21:33, 18 May 2021 (UTC) |
||
:: :) --[[User:Nig|Nig]] ([[User talk:Nig|talk]]) 22:10, 18 May 2021 (UTC) |
|||
''Addendum:'' My apologies. I was thinking so hard about creating my first new page this morning that I forgot to sign my enquiry. It was at 10:26, 18 May 2021 (UTC). --[[User:Nig|Nig]] ([[User talk:Nig|talk]]) 22:10, 18 May 2021 (UTC) |
|||
Latest revision as of 22:10, 18 May 2021
Clarification please
The task is called "Triplet of three numbers", but the description requires the "numbers n" associated with three numbers. Can this be clarified? All but one of the contributions so far hedge their bets and return both.
- Added a comment to said entry. I'll also note that 6 entries say 46 found, 10 do not.
- I suspect there is a prime +4 +6 task knocking about somewhere that is effectively identical to this.
- Ah, obviously: Prime_triplets and/or Cousin_primes are so similar to this they should not be (a triplet of three) separate tasks. --Pete Lomax (talk)
Also, "of three" is somewhat superfluous after "Triplet".
- Wait till you see the triplets of seven numbers task, now that promises to be difficult... --Pete Lomax (talk) 21:33, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
Addendum: My apologies. I was thinking so hard about creating my first new page this morning that I forgot to sign my enquiry. It was at 10:26, 18 May 2021 (UTC). --Nig (talk) 22:10, 18 May 2021 (UTC)