Wiki
Wiki

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

Updated


Source. Theorem 2, p. 57, with the remark after it on p. 58, of P. Erdős, On some applications of Brun's method, Acta Univ. Szeged. Sect. Sci. Math. 13 (1949), 57--63, as identified on the source card.

Setting

As for Theorem 1 (p. 57): P(k,l)P(k,l) is the least prime in the progression kx+lkx+l, with 0<l<k0<l<k and (l,k)=1(l,k)=1.

Statement

Theorem 2 (p. 57, quoted). "Let c3>0c_3>0 be any constant. Then for c4φ(k)c_4\varphi(k) values of ll (c4=c4(c3)c_4=c_4(c_3))", followed by the display

P(k,l)<c3φ(k)log⁡k.(2)P(k,l)<c_3\varphi(k)\log k.\qquad(2)

The statement prints no range for kk and says "for c4φ(k)c_4\varphi(k) values", which the proof reads as at least that many. The proof (pp. 58--60) argues by contradiction from a sequence of moduli kik_i along which $P(k_i,l)\ge c_3\varphi(k_i)\log k_i$ for all but o(φ(ki))o(\varphi(k_i)) values of ll, so what it establishes is that the bound (2) holds for at least c4φ(k)c_4\varphi(k) values of ll for every sufficiently large kk, with c4>0c_4>0 depending only on c3c_3.

Remark (p. 58). The paper notes that, by the prime number theorem, P(k,l)=o(φ(k)log⁡k)P(k,l)=o(\varphi(k)\log k) can hold only for o(φ(k))o(\varphi(k)) values of ll, and calls Theorem 2 "in some sense the best possible."

Proof pointer

Pages 58--60. With x=c3φ(k)log⁡kx=c_3\varphi(k)\log k, let Ax(k)A_x(k) count the pairs of primes pi<pj≤xp_i<p_j\le x with pj≡pi(modk)p_j\equiv p_i\pmod k. If the primes up to xx (about a constant times φ(k)\varphi(k) of them, by Chebyshev's bounds) fell in only o(φ(k))o(\varphi(k)) classes, the Cauchy--Schwarz inequality would make Ax(k)/φ(k)A_x(k)/\varphi(k) unbounded. Against this, Schnirelmann's sieve bound for the number of primes pp with p+krp+kr also prime, summed over 1≤r≤x/k1\le r\le x/k, gives Ax(k)<c φ(k)A_x(k)<c\,\varphi(k) for every kk.

Read depth

Claims checked: the statement and the remark were read clause by clause on the printed pp. 57--58. The proof was read for its structure, not checked step by step. Nothing here is independently reviewed.

Bears on

  • Problem 971: the problem asks for many residues whose least prime is large; Theorem 2 is the opposite bound, that many residues have a small least prime, and it settles no part of the problem.