Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Statement
"Pomerance and I considered the following problem. Put and denote by the least prime which does not divide . Clearly,
This is clearly very crude. For bounded and, more generally, for , the factor in (10) can perhaps be replaced by . An interesting special case is . By choosing so that it is the product of the primes between and , we see that can be as large as . Is it true that for ? We could not even prove that ."
The bound (10) is stated with "Clearly" and no argument; the example is the only construction. Nothing else in the paper returns to .
Source. P. Erdős, Some unconventional problems in number theory, Acta Math. Acad. Sci. Hungar. 33 (1979), 71--80; printed p. 78 (PDF p. 8 of the 10-page scan), read on the page image.
Read depth. Claims checked: the passage was read clause by clause on the page image. The bound (10) and the example are asserted without proof; the example's indexing is checked under Proof pointer.
Proof pointer
None printed. Read as printed, the example fails: if is the product of the primes in , each such prime divides and so divides only if it divides , which it cannot for ; no prime of that range divides , and is the least prime above . The example works when rather than is that product, or when the product defining starts at , as the thread of Problem 457 notes: every prime up to divides one of the consecutive factors and every prime of the range divides (or ), so . The statement is Erdős's and the details are not supplied.
Dependencies
None stated; the prime number theorem underlies the sizes.
Bears on
- Problem 457: the origin passage for the question whether ; the site's header locator is [Er79d, p. 78].
- Problem 1181: the origin passage for the question whether , with Erdős's bound (10).