| 
 | 
 | 
N.B. A detailed on-line essay by S. Finch was the starting point for this entry.
Mills (1947) proved the existence of a constant 
 such that 
| (1) | 
| (2) | 
| (3) | 
| (4) | 
Hardy and Wright (1979) point out that, despite the beauty of such Formulas, they do not have any practical
consequences.  In fact, unless the exact value of 
 is known, the Primes themselves must be known in advance to
determine 
.  A generalization of Mills' theorem to an arbitrary sequence of Positive Integers
is given as an exercise by Ellison and Ellison (1985). Consequently, infinitely many values for 
 other than the number
 are possible.
References
Caldwell, C.  ``Mills' Theorem--A Generalization.''
  http://www.utm.edu/research/primes/notes/proofs/A3n.html.
 
Ellison, W. and Ellison, F.  Prime Numbers.  New York: Wiley, pp. 31-32, 1985.
 
Finch, S.  ``Favorite Mathematical Constants.''  http://www.mathsoft.com/asolve/constant/mills/mills.html
 
Hardy, G. H. and Wright, E. M.  An Introduction to the Theory of Numbers, 5th ed.
  Oxford, England: Clarendon Press, 1979.
 
Mills, W. H.  ``A Prime-Representing Function.''  Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 53, 604, 1947.
 
Mozzochi, C. J.  ``On the Difference Between Consecutive Primes.''  J. Number Th. 24, 181-187, 1986.
 
Ribenboim, P.  The Book of Prime Number Records, 2nd ed.  New York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 135 and 191-193, 1989.
 
Ribenboim, P.  The Little Book of Big Primes.  New York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 109-110, 1991.
 
| 
 | 
 | 
© 1996-9 Eric W. Weisstein