Talk:Prime conspiracy: Difference between revisions

Content added Content deleted
Line 76: Line 76:


Am I correct in assuming that there is   no   prime that ends in the decimal digit '''1''' that transits to the next prime which ends in a decimal digit '''2'''?     '''Pascal''' has this as part of its output;   would this be considered an error (incorrect output)?.   -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 02:03, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Am I correct in assuming that there is   no   prime that ends in the decimal digit '''1''' that transits to the next prime which ends in a decimal digit '''2'''?     '''Pascal''' has this as part of its output;   would this be considered an error (incorrect output)?.   -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 02:03, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

: Yes: 2 is the only prime that ends in decimal digit 2, and it's the first prime, so 2 can never be a successor. --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] ([[User talk:Rdm|talk]]) 02:31, 23 March 2016 (UTC)