Wiki
Wiki

Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.

Updated


Statement

Notation (p. 204): Γ(N)\Gamma(N) is the set of the subsets of {1,…,N}\{1,\ldots,N\}, A(n)A(n) and B(n)B(n) count elements up to nn, and [x][x] is the integer part.

Theorem 6 (p. 213, quoted with its displays). "Let"

0<ε<14.(31)0<\varepsilon<\frac14.\qquad(31)

"If N>N0(ε)N>N_0(\varepsilon), B⊂Γ(N)B\subset\Gamma(N) and"

B(N)<12log⁡1/εlog⁡N(32)B(N)<\frac{1}{2\log1/\varepsilon}\log N\qquad(32)

"then there exists a sequence A⊂Γ([N/2])A\subset\Gamma([N/2]) such that"

A([N/2])>(12−ε)[N2](33)A([N/2])>\Bigl(\frac12-\varepsilon\Bigr)\Bigl[\frac N2\Bigr]\qquad(33)

"holds and"

ax+ay=bz(34)a_x+a_y=b_z\qquad(34)

"is not solvable."

Here B⊂Γ(N)B\subset\Gamma(N) and A⊂Γ([N/2])A\subset\Gamma([N/2]) mean sets of integers in {1,…,N}\{1,\ldots,N\} and {1,…,[N/2]}\{1,\ldots,[N/2]\}. The sum in (34) allows x=yx=y.

Role in the paper (p. 212). Section 4 states that for sum intersector sets B(N)→+∞B(N)\to+\infty must hold, in contrast with Theorem 5 for differences; Theorem 6 is the quantitative form: a BB with fewer than log⁡N/(2log⁡1/ε)\log N/(2\log1/\varepsilon) elements misses the sums of a set AA as large as (33).

Sharpness left open (pp. 222--223). The paper does not know whether Theorem 6 is best possible and asks, as question (i): is it true that if lim⁡N→+∞f(N)=+∞\lim_{N\to+\infty}f(N)=+\infty, then for ε>0\varepsilon>0 and N>N0(ε)N>N_0(\varepsilon) there is a B⊂Γ(N)B\subset\Gamma(N) with B(N)<f(N)log⁡NB(N)<f(N)\log N such that A⊂Γ([N/2])A\subset\Gamma([N/2]) and A([N/2])>ε[N/2]A([N/2])>\varepsilon[N/2] imply the solvability of (34)?

Source. P. Erdős and A. Sárközy, On differences and sums of integers, II, Bull. Soc. Math. Grèce (N.S.) 18 (1977), no. 2, 204--223: the statement on p. 213, the proof on pp. 213--216, question (i) on p. 223. The edition read is identified on the source card.

Read depth. Claims checked: the statement and question (i) were read clause by clause on the printed pages. The proof was read but not checked step by step. Nothing here is independently reviewed.

Proof pointer

Pp. 213--216. Apply Dirichlet's simultaneous approximation theorem (35) to the k=B(N)k=B(N) numbers bi/[N/2]b_i/[N/2] with Q=ε4[N/2]Q=\frac\varepsilon4[N/2], giving q≤Qq\le Q with every ∥qbi/[N/2]∥<Q−1/k\lVert qb_i/[N/2]\rVert<Q^{-1/k} (36). Let AA be the integers a≤[N/2]a\le[N/2] whose fractional part {qa/[N/2]}\{qa/[N/2]\} lies strictly between 12Q1/k\frac1{2Q^{1/k}} and 12−12Q1/k\frac12-\frac1{2Q^{1/k}} (40). Every sum of two elements then has ∥q(ax+ay)/[N/2]∥>Q−1/k\lVert q(a_x+a_y)/[N/2]\rVert>Q^{-1/k}, so no bzb_z is such a sum. The fractional parts are equidistributed over the residues modulo ss, where r/s=q/[N/2]r/s=q/[N/2] in lowest terms (37)--(39), which gives A([N/2])≥[N/2](12−Q−1/k−ε2)A([N/2])\ge[N/2](\frac12-Q^{-1/k}-\frac\varepsilon2) (41), and (32) gives Q−1/k<2ε2≤ε/2Q^{-1/k}<2\varepsilon^2\le\varepsilon/2 for large NN (42).