MayankM wrote:
I have read some where that this result is true for n up to 16 consecutive integers. I'll look up the source and post soon.
it's true. 16 can be done and 17 can't. the counterexample for

are consecutive numbers of which the first equals

.
(in fact the first can be

for a natural

, mybe there exists a smaller example that i missed but the point is that there are infinitely many)
u can proove it for

basicaly same as ilthigore has done for

above only a bit more complicated.
let

be these consecutive numbers. if we set

to be devisable by

,

devisable by

,

by

and

by

. it's easy to check thet none of them is than relatively prime to all others. we can calculate

with china reminder theorem now.
what is left to do is to show that if there is a counter wxample for

than we can also find a counter example for

. im working on this now.