|
COMMENT
|
Cox and van der Poorten claim to show that 5, 11, 13, 17, ... are not members of this sequence. - Charles R Greathouse IV, Jul 02 2007
|
|
REFERENCES
|
N. J. A. Sloane and Simon Plouffe, The Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences, Academic Press, 1995 (includes this sequence).
N. J. A. Sloane, A Handbook of Integer Sequences, Academic Press, 1973 (includes this sequence).
C. D. Cox and A. J. van der Poorten, "On a sequence of prime numbers", Journal of the Australian Mathematical Society 8 (1968), pp. 571-574. [Note that the argument used here is incorrect, as pointed out by Naur.]
R. K. Guy and R. Nowakowski, Discovering primes with Euclid, Delta (Waukesha), Vol. 5, pp. 49-63, 1975.
T. Naur, Mullin's sequence of primes is not monotonic, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 90 (1984), 43-44.
S. S. Wagstaff, Jr., Computing Euclid's primes, Bull. Institute Combin. Applications, 8 (1993), 23-32.
|