Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Source. Theorem 3.1 and its proof, preprint pp. 7--8; Corollary 3.1, p. 8; Proposition 3.1, p. 5, with its proof on pp. 5--6. Read on the rendered pages. The edition read is identified on the source card.
Statement
Let , let be a sequence of positive integers and a sequence of integers. Suppose that for infinitely many the terms
form a geometric progression, and that
Then .
Here is the least integer at least (p. 7).
Corollary 3.1 (p. 8) is the case : with and as above, if for infinitely many the terms form a geometric progression and for , with , then .
Scope of the hypothesis (an observation of this page, not of the paper). The proof writes the ratio as with , coprime positive integers, so it covers only runs of nonzero terms with positive ratio. A run of zeros meets the printed wording, and a sequence that is zero from some index on gives a rational , so zero runs must be excluded. Remark 3.1 (p. 7) says the argument also works for a negative ratio under the extra inequality , in the notation of Proposition 3.1 below.
Proof pointer
The theorem is derived from Proposition 3.1 (p. 5). That proposition takes integers , and integers such that for infinitely many the run is a nonzero geometric progression with ratio , and coprime positive integers, , , ; under the two growth conditions (5) and (6) it concludes that , where . The proof forms an integer combination of tails of the series with -th difference weights, evaluates it with the summation identity of Lemma 2.3 (p. 4), and plays a lower bound for against its divisibility by . Theorem 3.1 takes , , and with , and checks (5) and (6) from the growth bound (pp. 7--8).
Dependencies
Proposition 3.1, Lemma 2.1 and Lemma 2.3 of the same paper.
Bears on
No catalog problem directly. It is the tool behind Corollary 3.2.