Primes and factorials

Is there a prime number p p that satisfies this inequality?

2018 ! + 2 p 2018 ! + 2018 2018!+2 \le p \le 2018!+2018

Note : 2018 ! 2018! is the factorial of 2018. That is, 2018 ! = 1 × 2 × 3 × × 2016 × 2017 × 2018. 2018!=1 \times 2 \times 3 \times \cdots \times 2016 \times 2017 \times 2018.

Yes No

This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and, finally, (c) loading the non-javascript version of this page . We're sorry about the hassle.

17 solutions

By the definition of the factorial, all numbers between 2018!+2 and 2018!+2018 (inclusive) are composite. Indeed, the number 2018!+2 is divisible by 2, the number 2018! + 3 is divisible by 3 and so on and so forth. So there is no prime p such that 2018!+1 < p < 2018!+2019.

This is the heart of the common proof that gaps between primes can be arbitrarily large. Simply substitute 2018 out for an arbitrary positive integer n n .

Chris Maitland - 2 years, 10 months ago

Log in to reply

What if n = 2?

A Former Brilliant Member - 2 years, 10 months ago

Log in to reply

That proves that 3 must be prime because it is the following integer outside of the gap

Andrew Olesen - 2 years, 9 months ago

Sicilian Magician --- In your explanation of a solution you have ...2018! + 2019 --- but in the problem you state ...2018! + 2018. Is the 2019 a typographical error or is it intended ?

Jesse Otis - 2 years, 10 months ago

Log in to reply

Jesse Otis, 2018 ! + 2 p 2018 ! + 2018 2018!+2 \leq p \leq 2018!+2018 is equivalent to 2018 ! + 1 < p < 2018 ! + 2019 2018!+1 < p < 2018!+2019 .

The Sicilian Magician - 2 years, 10 months ago

Log in to reply

How right you are. I didn't catch that earlier; thanks.

Jesse Otis - 2 years, 10 months ago

Another question about that: You have 'less than or equal to' symbols at first and say that it is equivalent to the expression with 'less than' symbols. Does it change from 'less than or equal to' to 'less than' when 1 is subtracted from + 2 on the left hand side and is added to the right hand side making it 2019 ?

Jesse Otis - 2 years, 10 months ago

Thanks it makes sense now!

Rahul Swaminathan - 2 years, 9 months ago

I'm still confused. why does this mean that there is no prime p such that 2018!+1 < p < 2018!+2019?

ultan shannon - 2 years, 9 months ago
Arjen Vreugdenhil
Aug 10, 2018

The number 2018 ! + x 2018! + x (with 1 x 2018 1 \leq x \leq 2018 ) can be factored as 2018 ! + x = 1 2 ( x 1 ) x ( x + 1 ) 2018 + x = x ( 1 2 ( x 1 ) ( x + 1 ) 2018 + 1 ) , \begin{aligned} 2018! + x & = 1 \cdot 2 \cdots (x-1)\cdot x \cdot (x+1) \cdots 2018 + x\\ & = x \cdot \large(\small 1 \cdot 2 \cdots (x-1) \cdot (x+1)\cdots 2018 + 1\large)\small, \end{aligned} showing that it is not prime if x 2 x \geq 2 .

So long as x <= 2018

Xifong Christian - 2 years, 10 months ago

Log in to reply

Correct.

And as long as x > 1 x > 1 .

Arjen Vreugdenhil - 2 years, 10 months ago

x has to be <=2018

Leafy Li - 2 years, 10 months ago

Thanks, now is more clear.

Byron Lopez - 2 years, 9 months ago
Naren Bhandari
Aug 12, 2018

Alternative

We want prime x ! + n p x ! + x c c c 1 < n x \begin{aligned} x! + n \leq p \leq x! +x \phantom{ccc} 1<n \leq x \\ \end{aligned} Whenever n = 2 k n=2k where n N x 2 n\in\mathbb N \leq \left \lfloor \frac{x}{2}\right\rfloor . p 2 k ( m + 1 ) . p\geq\,2k( m +1). 2 is the largest even prime which implies k ( m + 1 ) = 1 m = k 1 k < 0 k\,(m+1) = 1\implies m=k \mid 1-k < 0 shows that no primes exist. Also whenever n = 2 k + 1 n =2k+1 (odd) . p ( 2 k + 1 ) ( N + 1 ) N + 1 = 1 N = 0 p \leq \,(2k+ 1)\,(N+1)\implies N +1 =1 \implies N=0 which is not possible since N > 0 N>0 . So there are no any primes that satisfy the given inequality.

Note: Every prime is an odd number.

can you describe the symbol that you use before :( i don't understand what do you mean about m or k sorry

Ridha Aloina - 2 years, 10 months ago

Log in to reply

You mean . \left\lfloor .\right\rfloor . If so then we call it floor function that denotes the greatest integer less than or equal to x For any real number.

Here , m m and N N is outcame of the product of x ! x! excluding the common factors if x! + 2k+1. On the same manner is also the outcome of the product of m!+n.

Naren Bhandari - 2 years, 10 months ago
Dsykx Plays games
Aug 13, 2018

The maximun amount of the difference between p and 2018! + 2 and between p and 2018! + 2018 is 2016 (2018-2=2016), which is part of 2018! Hence I can conclude there is no such p exist.

The clearest explanation!

Nelson Thompson - 2 years, 10 months ago

perfect explanation

Khushi Kothari - 2 years, 10 months ago
Michael Fekadu
Aug 13, 2018

Here’s a not so mathy solution:

First open up your calculator app on your smartphone and attempt to calculate “2018!”

Notice the result is “Error” and thus consider the number to be “very big”

now look at the given problem

  • 2018! + 2 <= p <= 2018! + 2018

Subtract 2018! On all sides

  • 2 <= p - 2018! <= 2018

Interpret this as

  • 2 <= p - number too big for my calculator <= 2018

So this suggests that there may be some prime number p such that the result of p - 2018! Is between 2 & 2018.

Just choose “no”, because the numbers are hella big. Again, not a very mathy solution. But it worked, lol.

Jam M
Aug 13, 2018

If p = 2018 ! + n p = 2018! + n where n { 2 , 3 , , 2018 } n \in \{2, 3, \cdots, 2018\} , then n p n|p . Hence, p p is composite.

Marcus Madumo
Aug 16, 2018

The Prime Number Thoerem formalizes the intuitive idea that primes become less common as they become larger by precisely quantifying the rate at which this occurs. Using this knowledge one can calculate the probability of a number being prime given the size of N N

Since 2018! and 2018! + 2018 both have 5795 digits

log 1 0 5795 = 13343.48 \log{10^{5795}} = 13343.48

Means 1 in 13343 numbers is a prime on that scale of digits. Therefore by pure chance the probability that p is prime is 0.000075% Hence you have a high probability of being right by simply saying no.

Mary Arans
Aug 14, 2018

2018! divides all numbers n for 2 < n < 2018. Thus 2018! + 2 to 2018! + 2018 are composite. The answer is no.

All the numbers from 2018 ! + 2 2018!+2 to 2018 ! + 2018 2018!+2018 are composite. 2018 ! + 2 2018!+2 is divisible by 2 2 , 2018 ! + 3 2018!+3 is divisible by 3 . We can say n ! + k n! + k is divisible by k k for n 2 , 2 k n n \ge 2, 2 \le k \le n . So there is no such prime. So the answer is N O \boxed{NO}

Let's suppose p p exists, then p = 2018 ! + n p=2018!+n for some natural number n n . As 2 n 2018 2\leq n \leq 2018 , we know that 2018 m o d n = 0 2018 \mod n =0 , and then: p = 2018 ! + n = n ( 1 + 2018 ! n ) p=2018!+n=n(1+\frac{2018!}{n}) And, therefore, p p is not prime, which is a contradiction. In conclusion, there is not such prime number p p

Lance Fernando
Aug 19, 2018

2018! = 2018 2017 2016 ... 3 2 1 We're given with 2018! + 2 <= p <= 2018! + 2018. Note that if we substitute 2018! with respect to the LHS, the range becomes: 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 ... 3 2 1 + 2 <= p <= 2018 2017 2016 2015 ... 3 2*1 = 2018.

Here, we generalize the range as n! + 2 <= p <= n! + n, for which p = n! + k, where 2 <= k <= n. By factorization, there is no prime number p that can be found within the range.

Rocco Dalto
Aug 16, 2018

Let k k be a positive integer ( k + 1 ) ! + j \implies (k + 1)! + j where ( 2 j k + 1 ) (2 \leq j \leq k + 1) is a list of k k consecutive composite integers.

Let k k be a positive integer and ( 2 j k + 1 ) (2 \leq j \leq k + 1) .

( k + 1 ) ! + j = j ( ( k + 1 ) k ( j + 1 ) ( j 1 ) 2 1 ) j ( k + 1 ) ! + j ( k + 1 ) ! + j (k + 1)! + j = j((k + 1) * k * * * (j + 1) * (j - 1) * * * 2 * 1) \implies j|(k + 1)! + j \implies (k + 1)! + j is a list of k k consecutive composite integers.

For k = 2017 k = 2017 we have a list of 2017 2017 consecutive composite integers. That is, ( 2018 ) ! + j (2018)! + j where ( 2 j 2018 ) (2 \leq j \leq 2018) is a list of 2017 2017 consecutive composite integers.

Actually, this is a well known theorem that shows there are arbitrarily large gaps between any two primes.

Priyanka Sharma
Aug 16, 2018

jhgkhjlkjlkjbhgv L a T e X LaTeX

David Trapp
Aug 14, 2018

We are looking for a number p=2018!+n. Since this can be written as (2018!/n + 1)*n and we know that with the given conditions, 2018!/n must be integer, the resulting p cannot be a prime number (because we just wrote it as product of two integers, none of which were 1).

i guessed

well if a = b then c = b then why am i doig this is this enough smart to post thanks L a T e X LaTeX mm latex 12 2019 ! \frac{12}{2019!}

If I divide the 3 members of the inequality by 2018! (inequality does not change direction by dividing by a positive number) I get that there has to be a prime number divided by 2018! between 3 and 2019. That prime number would have to be greater than the right-hand side of the original inequality.

Rico Linke
Aug 13, 2018

A very clumsy solution but it worked: 2018! is a very very big number. for example, the number of atoms in the observable universe is a billionth of a billionth of billionth...... percent of 2018!. The difference between 2018! + 2 and 2018! + 2018 is 2016, which is a very small gap compared to 2018! And if you look at very big prime numbers, you will realize that they have massive gaps between each other in comparison to 2016. So the probability that a prime number satisfies this is very small.

0 pending reports

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...