3.1.1, due September 28

In order to prove that there are infinitely many primes, I most like the first proof, which uses p1p2...pn +1. I like it because it is concise, proves the point, and makes sense for my way of thinking. The next proof is fine, but then I don't really understand the proofs that use factorials. I don't really like have so many different proofs of the same theorem because I'm the kind of person who likes to pick what works for me and then "not worry" about the rest. I feel like if I take that approach with this section, then I'm not learning what was intended.