# Infinitude of primes using series introduced in Connes' paper on Wilson's theorem

Consider the following sum:

$$S(p)=\sum_{n=2}^p\sin^2\left(\frac{π\Gamma(n)}{2n}\right)$$

The summand is zero for non-primes, and finite and non-decreasing for primes

For more details see the key paper: Connes' paper on Wilson's theorem

Question :

Is there any way we can prove infinitude of primes using above series ?

I tried to attack this problem in my previous questions . I just posted this separately new question (without stating any of my work) to start fresh and expecting new methods and views from users .

Any suggestions and comments are welcome .

Possible unified Applications: We can apply it to other primes of special forms whose Infinitude is unknown. (as Γ is nicely analytic):

(1)$$S_2(p)=\sum_{n=2}^p\sin^2\left(\frac{π\Gamma(n)}{2n}\right)\sin^2\left(\frac{π\Gamma(n+2)}{2(n+2)}\right)$$

(2)$$S_l(p)=\sum_{n=2}^p\sin^2\left(\frac{π\Gamma(n^2+1)}{2(n^2+1)}\right)$$

Etc.

• So essentially you'd like to show that $S(p)\rightarrow\infty$? for $p\rightarrow\infty$? – Alex R. Mar 31 at 22:38
• @AlexR. Yes,sir – Bambi Mar 31 at 22:39
• Not that this isn't an extremely interesting idea, but I honestly don't see a good way to go forward in general unless one pulls out some extremely difficult mathematics. For example, there really isn't that much difference between $S_2(p)$ and $S_3(p)$ but we would expect the first sum to go to infinity while the second sum converges after the first few terms. However, from an analytic standpoint, I couldn't tell you what the difference is between the series (just that there must be one). – QC_QAOA May 14 at 4:27
• @QC_QAOA seeing the wide range of applications, it's worth to pull that extremely difficult mathematics. – Bambi May 14 at 7:06
• @QC_QAOA there is no $S_3$ it's $S_l$ . Also it's not seem convergent . – Bambi May 14 at 19:15