Reading the article, many false claims can be spotted: 1) This idea is not new, the same periodicity was found previously. 2) Their idea is the extension of the

Reading the article, many false claims can be spotted: 1) This idea is not new, the same periodicity was found previously. 2) Their idea is the extension of the well known fact any prime is either of the form 6n+1 or 6n -1 with n a Natural number. In this case, the second primorial 6 = 2x3 is used. They use the 4th primorial 210 = 2x3x5x7. The problem with these "predictive" way to recognize primes is the fact that quite soon false positive start to emerge. For example, in the case of 6 the first false positive is 25 = 6x4 +1. In fact, it is very easy to know to which extent is the scheme valid; to the square of the first predicted square, in case of 6, it is 5, therefore 25 is the limit. In their case, their system will predict 11, but it will start to fail as early as 121. Even they recognize that for "large" primes they need to incorporate 11 in the scheme, but such a new method will also start to fail at the deceptively small 169. 3) Therefore, this paper is no breakthrough as the primes are infinite, they method can't predict all primes, and they even fail to recognize the limits of their method. In the paper mentioned before, these facts are all treated and an extended symmetry among the prime numbers found. *The Prime Numbers Hidden Symmetric Structure and its Relation to the Twin Prime Infinitude and an Improved Prime Number Theorem; https://cds.cern.ch/record/1000658?ln=es https://cds.cern.ch/record/1000658?ln=es