Wiki
Wiki

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

Updated


Source. Theorem 4.1, preprint p. 6; proof pp. 6--7; the paragraph opening Section 4 (p. 6). Read on the rendered pages. The paper is cited by its record on the source card.

Statement

Let (an)n≥1(a_n)_{n\ge1} and (bn)n≥1(b_n)_{n\ge1} be sequences of positive integers for which S:=∑n≥1bn/anS:=\sum_{n\ge1}b_n/a_n converges, and let An=lcm⁡(a1,…,an)A_n=\operatorname{lcm}(a_1,\ldots,a_n). Suppose

lim sup⁡n→∞An−1(bn+1anan+1−bnan)≤0.\limsup_{n\to\infty}A_{n-1}\Bigl(\frac{b_{n+1}a_n}{a_{n+1}}-\frac{b_n}{a_n}\Bigr)\le0.

Then SS is rational if and only if

an+1=bn+1bnan(an−1)+1for large n.a_{n+1}=\frac{b_{n+1}}{b_n}a_n(a_n-1)+1\qquad\text{for large }n.

The paper says (p. 6) that the proof is based on the proofs of Erdős and Straus (J. Indian Math. Soc. 27 (1964), 129--133) but is much simpler and more general.

Proof pointer (pp. 6--7)

For S=r/qS=r/q the proof works with the tails Rn⋆=∑k>nbk/akR^\star_n=\sum_{k>n}b_k/a_k, for which qAnRn⋆qA_nR^\star_n is a positive integer. The hypothesis makes anRn⋆−Rn−1⋆a_nR^\star_n-R^\star_{n-1} smaller than 2ϵ/An−12\epsilon/A_{n-1} for large nn; with ϵ=1/(4q)\epsilon=1/(4q) an integrality argument makes the products a1⋯anRn⋆a_1\cdots a_nR^\star_n eventually nonincreasing, hence eventually constant, and the recurrence follows. The converse direction is a telescoping identity for the partial sums from the index where the recurrence starts.

Relation to problem 243

With bn=1b_n=1 the hypothesis reads lim sup⁡(An−1/an)(an2/an+1−1)≤0\limsup(A_{n-1}/a_n)(a_n^2/a_{n+1}-1)\le0 and the conclusion is the recurrence an+1=an2−an+1a_{n+1}=a_n^2-a_n+1 for large nn that problem 243 asks for. The problem's hypothesis an+1/an2→1a_{n+1}/a_n^2\to1 makes the second factor tend to 00 but places no bound on An−1/anA_{n-1}/a_n, so it does not imply the theorem's hypothesis: the theorem settles the problem only for sequences that also satisfy that condition. The paper derives its Corollary 4.1 from this theorem.

Bears on. #243 (context: with bn=1b_n=1 the conclusion is the problem's recurrence, under a hypothesis the problem's does not imply).