Sums of pairwise different prime numbers












2












$begingroup$


I'm interested in all natural numbers, that are the sum of pariwise different prime numbers. For example 10 is such a number, since



$10 = 7 + 3$



My suspicion is that almost every natural number is the sum of pairwise different prime numbers. Actually by my pen & paper calculations, I did not find a natural number larger than 6 that is not such a sum, but I did not calculate much, so maybe there are even small numbers that are not a sum of pairwise different primes.



So my questions are these:



Is there any natural number larger than 6, which is not the sum of pairwise different primes? If not, any idea how to prove this?



And what's about the natural numbers, that are the sum of at least n natural prime numbers, with $n in mathbb{N}$? Is there any knowledge about these numbers?



Regards,
S. M. Roch



Edit: I'm sorry, I forgot to say for my first question, that I also accept the sum of not only two prime numbers. So for example



$20 = 11 + 7 + 2$



is also such a sum, and for every prime number the number is its sum itself.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    $11$ isn't such a sum. Or did you ask specifically about even numbers?
    $endgroup$
    – Arthur
    Aug 11 '16 at 22:22








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    The idea that all even natural numbers can be written as 2 primes is one of the most famous conjectures in mathematics, the Goldbach Conjecture.
    $endgroup$
    – Zestylemonzi
    Aug 11 '16 at 22:24












  • $begingroup$
    @Zestylemonzi the Goldbach Conjecture only deals with even numbers and allows the sum of any two prime numbers. On topic: every uneven number $2k+1$ can be written as the sum of two prime numbers $pneq q$ if and only if $2k-1$ is prime. In this case we have $(2k-1)+2=2k+1$. Otherwise we will need to find two prime numbers with neither of them being two, thus they will be uneven and their sum can never be an uneven number.
    $endgroup$
    – Hirshy
    Aug 11 '16 at 22:29






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    If Goldbach is true, every odd number $> 5$ is the sum of at most $3$ primes.
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Israel
    Aug 11 '16 at 22:40










  • $begingroup$
    Thank you for your comments. For my first question, I meant the sum of an arbitrary number of prime numbers. I'm sorry, I added this in the "Edit" paragraph now.
    $endgroup$
    – S. M. Roch
    Aug 11 '16 at 22:49
















2












$begingroup$


I'm interested in all natural numbers, that are the sum of pariwise different prime numbers. For example 10 is such a number, since



$10 = 7 + 3$



My suspicion is that almost every natural number is the sum of pairwise different prime numbers. Actually by my pen & paper calculations, I did not find a natural number larger than 6 that is not such a sum, but I did not calculate much, so maybe there are even small numbers that are not a sum of pairwise different primes.



So my questions are these:



Is there any natural number larger than 6, which is not the sum of pairwise different primes? If not, any idea how to prove this?



And what's about the natural numbers, that are the sum of at least n natural prime numbers, with $n in mathbb{N}$? Is there any knowledge about these numbers?



Regards,
S. M. Roch



Edit: I'm sorry, I forgot to say for my first question, that I also accept the sum of not only two prime numbers. So for example



$20 = 11 + 7 + 2$



is also such a sum, and for every prime number the number is its sum itself.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    $11$ isn't such a sum. Or did you ask specifically about even numbers?
    $endgroup$
    – Arthur
    Aug 11 '16 at 22:22








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    The idea that all even natural numbers can be written as 2 primes is one of the most famous conjectures in mathematics, the Goldbach Conjecture.
    $endgroup$
    – Zestylemonzi
    Aug 11 '16 at 22:24












  • $begingroup$
    @Zestylemonzi the Goldbach Conjecture only deals with even numbers and allows the sum of any two prime numbers. On topic: every uneven number $2k+1$ can be written as the sum of two prime numbers $pneq q$ if and only if $2k-1$ is prime. In this case we have $(2k-1)+2=2k+1$. Otherwise we will need to find two prime numbers with neither of them being two, thus they will be uneven and their sum can never be an uneven number.
    $endgroup$
    – Hirshy
    Aug 11 '16 at 22:29






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    If Goldbach is true, every odd number $> 5$ is the sum of at most $3$ primes.
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Israel
    Aug 11 '16 at 22:40










  • $begingroup$
    Thank you for your comments. For my first question, I meant the sum of an arbitrary number of prime numbers. I'm sorry, I added this in the "Edit" paragraph now.
    $endgroup$
    – S. M. Roch
    Aug 11 '16 at 22:49














2












2








2


1



$begingroup$


I'm interested in all natural numbers, that are the sum of pariwise different prime numbers. For example 10 is such a number, since



$10 = 7 + 3$



My suspicion is that almost every natural number is the sum of pairwise different prime numbers. Actually by my pen & paper calculations, I did not find a natural number larger than 6 that is not such a sum, but I did not calculate much, so maybe there are even small numbers that are not a sum of pairwise different primes.



So my questions are these:



Is there any natural number larger than 6, which is not the sum of pairwise different primes? If not, any idea how to prove this?



And what's about the natural numbers, that are the sum of at least n natural prime numbers, with $n in mathbb{N}$? Is there any knowledge about these numbers?



Regards,
S. M. Roch



Edit: I'm sorry, I forgot to say for my first question, that I also accept the sum of not only two prime numbers. So for example



$20 = 11 + 7 + 2$



is also such a sum, and for every prime number the number is its sum itself.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




I'm interested in all natural numbers, that are the sum of pariwise different prime numbers. For example 10 is such a number, since



$10 = 7 + 3$



My suspicion is that almost every natural number is the sum of pairwise different prime numbers. Actually by my pen & paper calculations, I did not find a natural number larger than 6 that is not such a sum, but I did not calculate much, so maybe there are even small numbers that are not a sum of pairwise different primes.



So my questions are these:



Is there any natural number larger than 6, which is not the sum of pairwise different primes? If not, any idea how to prove this?



And what's about the natural numbers, that are the sum of at least n natural prime numbers, with $n in mathbb{N}$? Is there any knowledge about these numbers?



Regards,
S. M. Roch



Edit: I'm sorry, I forgot to say for my first question, that I also accept the sum of not only two prime numbers. So for example



$20 = 11 + 7 + 2$



is also such a sum, and for every prime number the number is its sum itself.







number-theory summation prime-numbers






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Aug 11 '16 at 22:46







S. M. Roch

















asked Aug 11 '16 at 22:20









S. M. RochS. M. Roch

674315




674315








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    $11$ isn't such a sum. Or did you ask specifically about even numbers?
    $endgroup$
    – Arthur
    Aug 11 '16 at 22:22








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    The idea that all even natural numbers can be written as 2 primes is one of the most famous conjectures in mathematics, the Goldbach Conjecture.
    $endgroup$
    – Zestylemonzi
    Aug 11 '16 at 22:24












  • $begingroup$
    @Zestylemonzi the Goldbach Conjecture only deals with even numbers and allows the sum of any two prime numbers. On topic: every uneven number $2k+1$ can be written as the sum of two prime numbers $pneq q$ if and only if $2k-1$ is prime. In this case we have $(2k-1)+2=2k+1$. Otherwise we will need to find two prime numbers with neither of them being two, thus they will be uneven and their sum can never be an uneven number.
    $endgroup$
    – Hirshy
    Aug 11 '16 at 22:29






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    If Goldbach is true, every odd number $> 5$ is the sum of at most $3$ primes.
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Israel
    Aug 11 '16 at 22:40










  • $begingroup$
    Thank you for your comments. For my first question, I meant the sum of an arbitrary number of prime numbers. I'm sorry, I added this in the "Edit" paragraph now.
    $endgroup$
    – S. M. Roch
    Aug 11 '16 at 22:49














  • 1




    $begingroup$
    $11$ isn't such a sum. Or did you ask specifically about even numbers?
    $endgroup$
    – Arthur
    Aug 11 '16 at 22:22








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    The idea that all even natural numbers can be written as 2 primes is one of the most famous conjectures in mathematics, the Goldbach Conjecture.
    $endgroup$
    – Zestylemonzi
    Aug 11 '16 at 22:24












  • $begingroup$
    @Zestylemonzi the Goldbach Conjecture only deals with even numbers and allows the sum of any two prime numbers. On topic: every uneven number $2k+1$ can be written as the sum of two prime numbers $pneq q$ if and only if $2k-1$ is prime. In this case we have $(2k-1)+2=2k+1$. Otherwise we will need to find two prime numbers with neither of them being two, thus they will be uneven and their sum can never be an uneven number.
    $endgroup$
    – Hirshy
    Aug 11 '16 at 22:29






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    If Goldbach is true, every odd number $> 5$ is the sum of at most $3$ primes.
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Israel
    Aug 11 '16 at 22:40










  • $begingroup$
    Thank you for your comments. For my first question, I meant the sum of an arbitrary number of prime numbers. I'm sorry, I added this in the "Edit" paragraph now.
    $endgroup$
    – S. M. Roch
    Aug 11 '16 at 22:49








1




1




$begingroup$
$11$ isn't such a sum. Or did you ask specifically about even numbers?
$endgroup$
– Arthur
Aug 11 '16 at 22:22






$begingroup$
$11$ isn't such a sum. Or did you ask specifically about even numbers?
$endgroup$
– Arthur
Aug 11 '16 at 22:22






2




2




$begingroup$
The idea that all even natural numbers can be written as 2 primes is one of the most famous conjectures in mathematics, the Goldbach Conjecture.
$endgroup$
– Zestylemonzi
Aug 11 '16 at 22:24






$begingroup$
The idea that all even natural numbers can be written as 2 primes is one of the most famous conjectures in mathematics, the Goldbach Conjecture.
$endgroup$
– Zestylemonzi
Aug 11 '16 at 22:24














$begingroup$
@Zestylemonzi the Goldbach Conjecture only deals with even numbers and allows the sum of any two prime numbers. On topic: every uneven number $2k+1$ can be written as the sum of two prime numbers $pneq q$ if and only if $2k-1$ is prime. In this case we have $(2k-1)+2=2k+1$. Otherwise we will need to find two prime numbers with neither of them being two, thus they will be uneven and their sum can never be an uneven number.
$endgroup$
– Hirshy
Aug 11 '16 at 22:29




$begingroup$
@Zestylemonzi the Goldbach Conjecture only deals with even numbers and allows the sum of any two prime numbers. On topic: every uneven number $2k+1$ can be written as the sum of two prime numbers $pneq q$ if and only if $2k-1$ is prime. In this case we have $(2k-1)+2=2k+1$. Otherwise we will need to find two prime numbers with neither of them being two, thus they will be uneven and their sum can never be an uneven number.
$endgroup$
– Hirshy
Aug 11 '16 at 22:29




1




1




$begingroup$
If Goldbach is true, every odd number $> 5$ is the sum of at most $3$ primes.
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
Aug 11 '16 at 22:40




$begingroup$
If Goldbach is true, every odd number $> 5$ is the sum of at most $3$ primes.
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
Aug 11 '16 at 22:40












$begingroup$
Thank you for your comments. For my first question, I meant the sum of an arbitrary number of prime numbers. I'm sorry, I added this in the "Edit" paragraph now.
$endgroup$
– S. M. Roch
Aug 11 '16 at 22:49




$begingroup$
Thank you for your comments. For my first question, I meant the sum of an arbitrary number of prime numbers. I'm sorry, I added this in the "Edit" paragraph now.
$endgroup$
– S. M. Roch
Aug 11 '16 at 22:49










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















1












$begingroup$

A sketch of a proof:



For sufficiently large $N$, the Prime Number Theorem guarantees a prime $p$ between $N/2$ and $N-6$, $N/2lt plt N-6$. This implies $6lt N-plt N/2lt N$, so strong induction tells us $N-p$ is the sum of distinct primes, $N-p=p_1+p_2+cdots+p_n$ with $p_1lt p_2ltcdotslt p_n$. But $N-plt N/2lt p$ tells us these primes are all less than $p$. Thus $N=p_1+p_2+cdots+p_n+p$ with $p_1lt p_2ltcdotslt p_nlt p$.



Note, Bertrand's postulate, which guarantees a prime between $N/2$ and $N$, isn't quite good enough. E.g., the only primes between $17/2$ and $17$ are $11$ and $13$, and neither $17-11=6$ nor $17-13=4$ can be written as a sum of distinct primes.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    This is exactly what I wanted. That's great. Thank you.
    $endgroup$
    – S. M. Roch
    Aug 11 '16 at 23:50



















1












$begingroup$

There are lots of numbers greater than $6$ that are not the sum of pairwise different primes, like all the odd primes greater than $5$ that are not the larger part of a twin prime pair. If $n$ is odd, then so is $n - 2$. Remember that two odd primes add up to an even number.



In the case of $11$, we see that $11 - 2 = 9$, $11 - 3 = 8$, $11 - 5 = 6$ and $11 - 7 = 4$. Clearly $9$ is the square of an odd prime, and the rest are even numbers other than $2$. Look at Sloane's A014092 for plenty more examples.



For even $n$, you're talking about the Goldbach conjecture, as the commenters have already mentioned. For odd $n$, there is what is sometimes called the "weak" Goldbach conjecture, that every sufficiently large odd $n$ can be represented as the sum of three odd prime numbers.



Mathematicians have been able to prove both versions of the Goldbach conjecture for some numbers so large they are almost beyond the reach of our computers. But that doesn't disprove the possibility that a counterexample could exist just a little beyond your computer's ability.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$





















    -1












    $begingroup$

    Let me prove that ANY natural number n>6 can be written as the sum of two integers greater than 1,each of the summands being relatively prime.



    PROOF:

    First note that if d divides two integers a and b,then d must also divide their difference a-b.Therefore consecutive numbers are always relatively prime.Likewise,if a and b are both odd with difference 2 or 4,then a and b are relatively prime.



    Now let n be greater than 7.
    If n is odd,then n has the form n=2k+1,where k>3 is an integer.Thus we write the sum n=k+(k+1)
    If n is even,then n has the form n=2k,where k>4 is an integer
    -if k is even,we write n=(k-1)+(k+1);
    -if k is odd,we write n=(k-2)+(k+2).



    So we proved that ANY natural number n>6 can be written as the sum of two integers greater than 1,each of the summands being relatively prime!






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      I am sorry if the answer is not plain(I don't know how to use this LaTex or ...)
      $endgroup$
      – Melina
      Jan 2 at 14:16










    • $begingroup$
      But the question was not about summands being relatively prime (that's trivial), but about them being prime.
      $endgroup$
      – Henrik
      Jan 2 at 14:17













    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1889587%2fsums-of-pairwise-different-prime-numbers%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes








    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    1












    $begingroup$

    A sketch of a proof:



    For sufficiently large $N$, the Prime Number Theorem guarantees a prime $p$ between $N/2$ and $N-6$, $N/2lt plt N-6$. This implies $6lt N-plt N/2lt N$, so strong induction tells us $N-p$ is the sum of distinct primes, $N-p=p_1+p_2+cdots+p_n$ with $p_1lt p_2ltcdotslt p_n$. But $N-plt N/2lt p$ tells us these primes are all less than $p$. Thus $N=p_1+p_2+cdots+p_n+p$ with $p_1lt p_2ltcdotslt p_nlt p$.



    Note, Bertrand's postulate, which guarantees a prime between $N/2$ and $N$, isn't quite good enough. E.g., the only primes between $17/2$ and $17$ are $11$ and $13$, and neither $17-11=6$ nor $17-13=4$ can be written as a sum of distinct primes.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      This is exactly what I wanted. That's great. Thank you.
      $endgroup$
      – S. M. Roch
      Aug 11 '16 at 23:50
















    1












    $begingroup$

    A sketch of a proof:



    For sufficiently large $N$, the Prime Number Theorem guarantees a prime $p$ between $N/2$ and $N-6$, $N/2lt plt N-6$. This implies $6lt N-plt N/2lt N$, so strong induction tells us $N-p$ is the sum of distinct primes, $N-p=p_1+p_2+cdots+p_n$ with $p_1lt p_2ltcdotslt p_n$. But $N-plt N/2lt p$ tells us these primes are all less than $p$. Thus $N=p_1+p_2+cdots+p_n+p$ with $p_1lt p_2ltcdotslt p_nlt p$.



    Note, Bertrand's postulate, which guarantees a prime between $N/2$ and $N$, isn't quite good enough. E.g., the only primes between $17/2$ and $17$ are $11$ and $13$, and neither $17-11=6$ nor $17-13=4$ can be written as a sum of distinct primes.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      This is exactly what I wanted. That's great. Thank you.
      $endgroup$
      – S. M. Roch
      Aug 11 '16 at 23:50














    1












    1








    1





    $begingroup$

    A sketch of a proof:



    For sufficiently large $N$, the Prime Number Theorem guarantees a prime $p$ between $N/2$ and $N-6$, $N/2lt plt N-6$. This implies $6lt N-plt N/2lt N$, so strong induction tells us $N-p$ is the sum of distinct primes, $N-p=p_1+p_2+cdots+p_n$ with $p_1lt p_2ltcdotslt p_n$. But $N-plt N/2lt p$ tells us these primes are all less than $p$. Thus $N=p_1+p_2+cdots+p_n+p$ with $p_1lt p_2ltcdotslt p_nlt p$.



    Note, Bertrand's postulate, which guarantees a prime between $N/2$ and $N$, isn't quite good enough. E.g., the only primes between $17/2$ and $17$ are $11$ and $13$, and neither $17-11=6$ nor $17-13=4$ can be written as a sum of distinct primes.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    A sketch of a proof:



    For sufficiently large $N$, the Prime Number Theorem guarantees a prime $p$ between $N/2$ and $N-6$, $N/2lt plt N-6$. This implies $6lt N-plt N/2lt N$, so strong induction tells us $N-p$ is the sum of distinct primes, $N-p=p_1+p_2+cdots+p_n$ with $p_1lt p_2ltcdotslt p_n$. But $N-plt N/2lt p$ tells us these primes are all less than $p$. Thus $N=p_1+p_2+cdots+p_n+p$ with $p_1lt p_2ltcdotslt p_nlt p$.



    Note, Bertrand's postulate, which guarantees a prime between $N/2$ and $N$, isn't quite good enough. E.g., the only primes between $17/2$ and $17$ are $11$ and $13$, and neither $17-11=6$ nor $17-13=4$ can be written as a sum of distinct primes.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    answered Aug 11 '16 at 23:17









    Barry CipraBarry Cipra

    59.4k653126




    59.4k653126












    • $begingroup$
      This is exactly what I wanted. That's great. Thank you.
      $endgroup$
      – S. M. Roch
      Aug 11 '16 at 23:50


















    • $begingroup$
      This is exactly what I wanted. That's great. Thank you.
      $endgroup$
      – S. M. Roch
      Aug 11 '16 at 23:50
















    $begingroup$
    This is exactly what I wanted. That's great. Thank you.
    $endgroup$
    – S. M. Roch
    Aug 11 '16 at 23:50




    $begingroup$
    This is exactly what I wanted. That's great. Thank you.
    $endgroup$
    – S. M. Roch
    Aug 11 '16 at 23:50











    1












    $begingroup$

    There are lots of numbers greater than $6$ that are not the sum of pairwise different primes, like all the odd primes greater than $5$ that are not the larger part of a twin prime pair. If $n$ is odd, then so is $n - 2$. Remember that two odd primes add up to an even number.



    In the case of $11$, we see that $11 - 2 = 9$, $11 - 3 = 8$, $11 - 5 = 6$ and $11 - 7 = 4$. Clearly $9$ is the square of an odd prime, and the rest are even numbers other than $2$. Look at Sloane's A014092 for plenty more examples.



    For even $n$, you're talking about the Goldbach conjecture, as the commenters have already mentioned. For odd $n$, there is what is sometimes called the "weak" Goldbach conjecture, that every sufficiently large odd $n$ can be represented as the sum of three odd prime numbers.



    Mathematicians have been able to prove both versions of the Goldbach conjecture for some numbers so large they are almost beyond the reach of our computers. But that doesn't disprove the possibility that a counterexample could exist just a little beyond your computer's ability.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$


















      1












      $begingroup$

      There are lots of numbers greater than $6$ that are not the sum of pairwise different primes, like all the odd primes greater than $5$ that are not the larger part of a twin prime pair. If $n$ is odd, then so is $n - 2$. Remember that two odd primes add up to an even number.



      In the case of $11$, we see that $11 - 2 = 9$, $11 - 3 = 8$, $11 - 5 = 6$ and $11 - 7 = 4$. Clearly $9$ is the square of an odd prime, and the rest are even numbers other than $2$. Look at Sloane's A014092 for plenty more examples.



      For even $n$, you're talking about the Goldbach conjecture, as the commenters have already mentioned. For odd $n$, there is what is sometimes called the "weak" Goldbach conjecture, that every sufficiently large odd $n$ can be represented as the sum of three odd prime numbers.



      Mathematicians have been able to prove both versions of the Goldbach conjecture for some numbers so large they are almost beyond the reach of our computers. But that doesn't disprove the possibility that a counterexample could exist just a little beyond your computer's ability.






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$
















        1












        1








        1





        $begingroup$

        There are lots of numbers greater than $6$ that are not the sum of pairwise different primes, like all the odd primes greater than $5$ that are not the larger part of a twin prime pair. If $n$ is odd, then so is $n - 2$. Remember that two odd primes add up to an even number.



        In the case of $11$, we see that $11 - 2 = 9$, $11 - 3 = 8$, $11 - 5 = 6$ and $11 - 7 = 4$. Clearly $9$ is the square of an odd prime, and the rest are even numbers other than $2$. Look at Sloane's A014092 for plenty more examples.



        For even $n$, you're talking about the Goldbach conjecture, as the commenters have already mentioned. For odd $n$, there is what is sometimes called the "weak" Goldbach conjecture, that every sufficiently large odd $n$ can be represented as the sum of three odd prime numbers.



        Mathematicians have been able to prove both versions of the Goldbach conjecture for some numbers so large they are almost beyond the reach of our computers. But that doesn't disprove the possibility that a counterexample could exist just a little beyond your computer's ability.






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$



        There are lots of numbers greater than $6$ that are not the sum of pairwise different primes, like all the odd primes greater than $5$ that are not the larger part of a twin prime pair. If $n$ is odd, then so is $n - 2$. Remember that two odd primes add up to an even number.



        In the case of $11$, we see that $11 - 2 = 9$, $11 - 3 = 8$, $11 - 5 = 6$ and $11 - 7 = 4$. Clearly $9$ is the square of an odd prime, and the rest are even numbers other than $2$. Look at Sloane's A014092 for plenty more examples.



        For even $n$, you're talking about the Goldbach conjecture, as the commenters have already mentioned. For odd $n$, there is what is sometimes called the "weak" Goldbach conjecture, that every sufficiently large odd $n$ can be represented as the sum of three odd prime numbers.



        Mathematicians have been able to prove both versions of the Goldbach conjecture for some numbers so large they are almost beyond the reach of our computers. But that doesn't disprove the possibility that a counterexample could exist just a little beyond your computer's ability.







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited Aug 11 '16 at 22:45

























        answered Aug 11 '16 at 22:40









        Mr. BrooksMr. Brooks

        16911237




        16911237























            -1












            $begingroup$

            Let me prove that ANY natural number n>6 can be written as the sum of two integers greater than 1,each of the summands being relatively prime.



            PROOF:

            First note that if d divides two integers a and b,then d must also divide their difference a-b.Therefore consecutive numbers are always relatively prime.Likewise,if a and b are both odd with difference 2 or 4,then a and b are relatively prime.



            Now let n be greater than 7.
            If n is odd,then n has the form n=2k+1,where k>3 is an integer.Thus we write the sum n=k+(k+1)
            If n is even,then n has the form n=2k,where k>4 is an integer
            -if k is even,we write n=(k-1)+(k+1);
            -if k is odd,we write n=(k-2)+(k+2).



            So we proved that ANY natural number n>6 can be written as the sum of two integers greater than 1,each of the summands being relatively prime!






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              I am sorry if the answer is not plain(I don't know how to use this LaTex or ...)
              $endgroup$
              – Melina
              Jan 2 at 14:16










            • $begingroup$
              But the question was not about summands being relatively prime (that's trivial), but about them being prime.
              $endgroup$
              – Henrik
              Jan 2 at 14:17


















            -1












            $begingroup$

            Let me prove that ANY natural number n>6 can be written as the sum of two integers greater than 1,each of the summands being relatively prime.



            PROOF:

            First note that if d divides two integers a and b,then d must also divide their difference a-b.Therefore consecutive numbers are always relatively prime.Likewise,if a and b are both odd with difference 2 or 4,then a and b are relatively prime.



            Now let n be greater than 7.
            If n is odd,then n has the form n=2k+1,where k>3 is an integer.Thus we write the sum n=k+(k+1)
            If n is even,then n has the form n=2k,where k>4 is an integer
            -if k is even,we write n=(k-1)+(k+1);
            -if k is odd,we write n=(k-2)+(k+2).



            So we proved that ANY natural number n>6 can be written as the sum of two integers greater than 1,each of the summands being relatively prime!






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              I am sorry if the answer is not plain(I don't know how to use this LaTex or ...)
              $endgroup$
              – Melina
              Jan 2 at 14:16










            • $begingroup$
              But the question was not about summands being relatively prime (that's trivial), but about them being prime.
              $endgroup$
              – Henrik
              Jan 2 at 14:17
















            -1












            -1








            -1





            $begingroup$

            Let me prove that ANY natural number n>6 can be written as the sum of two integers greater than 1,each of the summands being relatively prime.



            PROOF:

            First note that if d divides two integers a and b,then d must also divide their difference a-b.Therefore consecutive numbers are always relatively prime.Likewise,if a and b are both odd with difference 2 or 4,then a and b are relatively prime.



            Now let n be greater than 7.
            If n is odd,then n has the form n=2k+1,where k>3 is an integer.Thus we write the sum n=k+(k+1)
            If n is even,then n has the form n=2k,where k>4 is an integer
            -if k is even,we write n=(k-1)+(k+1);
            -if k is odd,we write n=(k-2)+(k+2).



            So we proved that ANY natural number n>6 can be written as the sum of two integers greater than 1,each of the summands being relatively prime!






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$



            Let me prove that ANY natural number n>6 can be written as the sum of two integers greater than 1,each of the summands being relatively prime.



            PROOF:

            First note that if d divides two integers a and b,then d must also divide their difference a-b.Therefore consecutive numbers are always relatively prime.Likewise,if a and b are both odd with difference 2 or 4,then a and b are relatively prime.



            Now let n be greater than 7.
            If n is odd,then n has the form n=2k+1,where k>3 is an integer.Thus we write the sum n=k+(k+1)
            If n is even,then n has the form n=2k,where k>4 is an integer
            -if k is even,we write n=(k-1)+(k+1);
            -if k is odd,we write n=(k-2)+(k+2).



            So we proved that ANY natural number n>6 can be written as the sum of two integers greater than 1,each of the summands being relatively prime!







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited Jan 2 at 15:16









            klirk

            2,626530




            2,626530










            answered Jan 2 at 13:58









            MelinaMelina

            83




            83












            • $begingroup$
              I am sorry if the answer is not plain(I don't know how to use this LaTex or ...)
              $endgroup$
              – Melina
              Jan 2 at 14:16










            • $begingroup$
              But the question was not about summands being relatively prime (that's trivial), but about them being prime.
              $endgroup$
              – Henrik
              Jan 2 at 14:17




















            • $begingroup$
              I am sorry if the answer is not plain(I don't know how to use this LaTex or ...)
              $endgroup$
              – Melina
              Jan 2 at 14:16










            • $begingroup$
              But the question was not about summands being relatively prime (that's trivial), but about them being prime.
              $endgroup$
              – Henrik
              Jan 2 at 14:17


















            $begingroup$
            I am sorry if the answer is not plain(I don't know how to use this LaTex or ...)
            $endgroup$
            – Melina
            Jan 2 at 14:16




            $begingroup$
            I am sorry if the answer is not plain(I don't know how to use this LaTex or ...)
            $endgroup$
            – Melina
            Jan 2 at 14:16












            $begingroup$
            But the question was not about summands being relatively prime (that's trivial), but about them being prime.
            $endgroup$
            – Henrik
            Jan 2 at 14:17






            $begingroup$
            But the question was not about summands being relatively prime (that's trivial), but about them being prime.
            $endgroup$
            – Henrik
            Jan 2 at 14:17




















            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1889587%2fsums-of-pairwise-different-prime-numbers%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Human spaceflight

            Can not write log (Is /dev/pts mounted?) - openpty in Ubuntu-on-Windows?

            File:DeusFollowingSea.jpg