Within the conceptual framework of number theory, we consider prime numbers and the classic still unsolved problem to find a complete law of their distribution. We ask ourselves if such persisting difficulties could be understood as due to theoretical incompatibilities. We consider the problem in the conceptual framework of computational theory. This article is a contribution to the philosophy of mathematics proposing different possible understandings of the supposed theoretical unavailability and indemonstrability of the existence of a law of distribution of prime numbers. Tentatively, we conceptually consider demonstrability as computability, in our case the conceptual availability of an algorithm able to compute the general properties of the presumed primes’ distribution law without computing such distribution. The link between the conceptual availability of a distribution law of primes and decidability is given by considering how to decide if a number is prime without computing. The supposed distribution law should allow for any given prime knowing the next prime without factorial computing. Factorial properties of numbers, such as their property of primality, require their factorisation (or equivalent, e.g., the sieves), i.e., effective computing. However, we have factorisation techniques available, but there are no (non-quantum) known algorithms which can effectively factor arbitrary large integers. Then factorisation is undecidable. We consider the theoretical unavailability of a distribution law for factorial properties, as being prime, equivalent to its non-computability, undecidability. The availability and demonstrability of a hypothetical law of distribution of primes is inconsistent with its undecidability. The perspective is to transform this conjecture into a theorem
