[seqfan] Re: A174397 and primes with negative value.

franktaw at netscape.net franktaw at netscape.net
Fri Mar 19 22:27:13 CET 2010

My cut at this is that negations of primes are very definitely prime.  
However, "the primes" is usually shorthand for "the primes of N" or 
"the primes of the non-negative integers" (these are the same, since 0 
is not prime).

This being the case, any use of "prime" to include the negative primes 
should be clearly identified.  A phrase like "positive or negative 
prime" is quite sufficient.

Franklin T. Adams-Watters

-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Mathar <mathar at strw.leidenuniv.nl>

V. Orlovsky is defending his definition in A174397 (with negative 
obviously) with a link to 
arguing that primes can be negative numbers, so the mention of absolute
values in the definition is not needed. I cannot make friend with that 
Is there a general consensus (at least within the OEIS) that primes are 
>=2 ?

More information about the SeqFan mailing list