|
|
A069923
|
|
Number of primes p such that 2^n <= p <= 2^n + prime(n).
|
|
1
|
|
|
2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 2, 5, 3, 5, 5, 4, 7, 9, 4, 5, 5, 7, 3, 4, 7, 3, 7, 6, 8, 6, 5, 8, 4, 6, 10, 3, 5, 3, 7, 6, 7, 7, 8, 6, 7, 5, 7, 5, 8, 4, 2, 7, 6, 6, 7, 3, 6, 6, 11, 6, 6, 9, 8, 8, 7, 7, 6, 6, 10, 8, 7, 10, 9, 7, 5, 5, 9, 6, 8, 11, 9, 5, 8, 6, 10, 9, 5, 9, 12, 6, 7, 4, 7, 6, 9, 8, 5, 7, 6, 7, 3, 4, 8
(list;
graph;
refs;
listen;
history;
text;
internal format)
|
|
|
OFFSET
|
1,1
|
|
COMMENTS
|
For any n>0, is there always at least one prime p such that 2^n <= p <= 2^n + prime(n)? (checked up to n=250) In this case, that would be stronger than the Schinzel conjecture: "for m > 1 there's at least one prime p such that m <= p <= m + log(m)^2" since, for n > 2, prime(n) < log(2^n)^2 = n^2*log(2).
a(n)>=1 for n<=2000. But a(1403)=1 is a "near miss". - Robert Israel, Aug 29 2018
|
|
LINKS
|
|
|
MAPLE
|
f:= proc(n) local pn;
pn:= ithprime(n);
nops(select(isprime, [seq(i, i=2^n+1 .. 2^n+pn, 2)]))
end proc:
f(1):= 2:
|
|
PROG
|
(PARI) for(n=1, 65, print1(sum(i=2^n, 2^n+prime(n), isprime(i)), ", "))
|
|
CROSSREFS
|
|
|
KEYWORD
|
easy,nonn
|
|
AUTHOR
|
|
|
STATUS
|
approved
|
|
|
|