[seqfan] Re: Prime numbers that differ by 30 with no primes between p and p+30

[M. F. Hasler]

On Tue, Dec 31, 2019, 20:27 Harvey P. Dale <hpd at hpdale.org> wrote:

> Chris:
>
>             You are correct that 69623 is the smallest prime such that its
> immediate predecessor prime and its immediate successor prime are both
> separated from it by 30. Here are the next such primes up through the
> 100,000th prime: 110681, 134639, (...)
>

            That sequence does not appear in the OEIS.
>

Yed,, you submitted it in 2000 as http://oeis.org/A053075
--
Maximilian


> -----Original Message-----
>
> It is probably not desirable that every sequence involving pairs should
> have all four versions in OEIS, though!
>

I agree.

The union version for (p,p+30) being consecutive primes would face the same
> problem as for 5 with the prime pairs: should the p such that
>
> (p-30,p,p+30) are consecutive primes, occur once or twice? [The smallest
> such p is 69623, and there are undoubtedly infinitely many of them.]
>
>
>
> --
>
> Chris Thompson
>
> Email: cet1 at cam.ac.uk<mailto:cet1 at cam.ac.uk>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Seqfan Mailing list -
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__list.seqfan.eu_&d=DwIGaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=XiYos0f3ggKs3-anzJfncQ&m=ipYPiTMW-aJ0bqVytJ3Ki_LdfccfsilTeqxVVBz1okE&s=-Xr7gGi47_LZ4Cn6wLvRxhdPQ79hjIZNrkKYqNzyauA&e=
>
> --
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>