Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Source. Laczkovich (1984), Lemma 2, printed pp. 112–114 (PDF pp. 4–6).
Statement
Let be an integer, and let be an irrational real number with bounded regular continued-fraction partial quotients. For every real , there is a finite such that
Here is the backward closure.
Exact external input. Use the convergent errors, recurrence, and denominator bounds in Continued-fraction inputs.
Source precision. On p. 113 the source chooses a step involving either or , but subsequently writes in both cases and uses in both factors of the denominator comparison. That identity does not hold in the second case. Its printed auxiliary constant is . The proof below uses the chosen denominator explicitly and enlarges that constant to throughout the seed and induction. It proves the same finite-existence statement (1). This is a compilation-supplied proof repair, not an author-issued erratum and not a disproof of Lemma 2.
Bears on. Problem 1125, through Theorem 2.
Proof
Write , and choose such that for every . Put
and define the finite seed
There are finitely many allowed , and finitely many integers in the displayed interval for each , so is finite.
For each fixed with , set . The consecutive points , , all lie in the seed interval: the smallest is strictly larger than . By backward closure with step , every point of at most belongs to . This includes the needed integers, for .
We prove, by induction on the positive integer , the stronger assertion
For , the preceding paragraph proves (3), since .
Now let and assume (3) for smaller positive absolute coefficients. Choose the largest for which . It exists, since , and is finite because the denominators are unbounded. In particular . Maximality and the denominator bound give
Among and , choose an index such that the error has the sign opposite to . Consecutive errors have opposite signs. Write , , and set
Then and
For , the error bound gives directly; for , it gives . The lower bound for follows from (4) and , also valid for .
Suppose . For each write
Since ,
Moreover, (4)–(5) yield
All denominators are positive. Multiplying the last strict inequality by gives
Consequently
The induction hypothesis puts every in . Its closure property then puts there as well, proving (3). Every noninteger point of at most satisfies the hypothesis of (3); integers at most were already included. This proves (1).