Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

?
Lv 7
? asked in Science & MathematicsMathematics · 3 years ago

Prime pairs?

Prove that the set { 1, 2, ..., 2k} can be partitioned into k distinct pairs {a_i, b_i} such that for each i, ( a_i + b_i) is prime

6 Answers

Relevance
  • 3 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    The proof is by induction on n.

    For n = 1 the result is trivial.

    {1+2} = 3

    For n > 1, let p be a prime satisfying 2n < p < 4n. Since 4n is not prime we have p = 2n + m for 1 ≤ m < 2k. Pair 2n with m, 2n−1 with m+1, and continue up to n+⌈k⌉ with n+⌊k⌋ (this last is a valid pair since m is odd).

    This deals with all of the numbers in {m, m+1, …, 2n}; the inductive hypothesis deals with {1, 2, …, m−1} (again since m is odd).

  • Kevin7
    Lv 7
    3 years ago

    i think try to diagram the math problem it might help.Partitions are the number of ways a number can be added up

  • ?
    Lv 7
    3 years ago

    This is a famous problem, risen to the status of conjecture. All attempts to mathematically prove it have come up empty.

  • 3 years ago

    I agree with rotchm.

    Take k = 60.

    There are 60/2 = 30 pairs, so we need 30 primes less than 2x60 = 120. And we cannot use 2 because no pair of numbers 1 to 60 add to 2.

    The 30th prime number, excluding 2, is 127.

    Not possible when k = 60, so not true.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • ?
    Lv 6
    3 years ago

    There's a proof here that uses a high-powered theorem, so it's not particularly satisfying. http://mathhelpforum.com/number-theory/119181-part...

    Can anyone give a simpler proof?

  • ?
    Lv 7
    3 years ago

    It cant be proven, since it is false. [Oups, see below, the op statement may be true].

    ---my original reply

    Hint: prime counting function π(n)

    Eg: Let k = 100. Your set is thus 1,2,..., 200.

    You want to partition this into 100 pairs {a_i, b_i}, such as their sum is prime.

    The sum of a pair has a minimum of 3 and a max that can be 101 to 399.

    But π(399) = 78. IOW, there are only 78 primes from 1 to 399. (There are less than that from 1 to 101).

    But you need 100 of them, thus impossible. QED.

    --end of my original reply.

    BUT.... I see now...Above I assumed that the a_i + b_i gives distinct (prime) values. You did not require that.

    Again, for k=100, we can chose many pairs such that their sum is 199 say: {1,198}, {2,197}...{99,100}.

    This has a max of 99 pairs. In fact, you always have less than k pairs; you have at maximum k-1 pairs. Hence impossible. BUT if you consider the possibilities of pairs such as {2,197} and {2, 3} in the same set, then you can trivially generate more pairs, hence possible. And if the a+b is allowed be be greater than 2k (that is not excluded in the op, hence is permitted), then by the theorem m<p<2m, just chose that p as to generate your pairs, as other replies have pointed out.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.