Wiki
Wiki

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

Updated


Source. Theorem 1 and display (1.7), p. 2, of D. A. Goldston, J. Pintz and C. Y. Yıldırım, Primes in tuples I, Ann. of Math. (2) 170 (2009), no. 2, 819--862, with labels and page as printed in the arXiv preprint arXiv:math/0508185v1 (10 August 2005), the edition read for the source card.

Statement

Let θ(n)=log⁡n\theta(n)=\log n when nn is prime and θ(n)=0\theta(n)=0 otherwise, and let θ(N;q,a)\theta(N;q,a) be the sum of θ(n)\theta(n) over n≤Nn\le N with n≡a(modq)n\equiv a\pmod q (p. 1). The primes have level of distribution ϑ\vartheta when, for every A>0A>0 and every ε>0\varepsilon>0,

∑q≤Q max⁡(a,q)=1∣θ(N;q,a)−Nφ(q)∣≪N(log⁡N)Awith Q=Nϑ−ε\sum_{q\le Q}\ \max_{(a,q)=1}\Bigl|\theta(N;q,a)-\frac{N}{\varphi(q)}\Bigr| \ll\frac{N}{(\log N)^A}\qquad\text{with } Q=N^{\vartheta-\varepsilon}

(displays (1.3) and (1.4), p. 2). The Bombieri--Vinogradov theorem gives level 1/21/2; the Elliott--Halberstam conjecture is level 11.

For a set H={h1,…,hk}\mathcal H=\{h_1,\dots,h_k\} of distinct non-negative integers, let νp(H)\nu_p(\mathcal H) be the number of residue classes modulo pp that the hih_i occupy. The set, and the tuple (n+h1,…,n+hk)(n+h_1,\dots,n+h_k), are admissible when νp(H)<p\nu_p(\mathcal H)<p for every prime pp (display (1.6), p. 2).

Theorem 1 (p. 2). Assume the primes have level of distribution ϑ>1/2\vartheta>1/2. Then there is a constant C(ϑ)C(\vartheta), depending only on ϑ\vartheta and explicitly calculable, such that every admissible kk-tuple with k≥C(ϑ)k\ge C(\vartheta) has at least two prime components for infinitely many nn. If ϑ≥0.971\vartheta\ge 0.971, this holds for every k≥6k\ge 6.

Display (1.7) (p. 2). The 66-tuple (n,n+4,n+6,n+10,n+12,n+16)(n,n+4,n+6,n+10,n+12,n+16) is admissible, so the Elliott--Halberstam conjecture implies

lim inf⁡n→∞ (pn+1−pn)≤16,\liminf_{n\to\infty}\,(p_{n+1}-p_n)\le 16,

where pnp_n is the nnth prime; that is, pn+1−pn≤16p_{n+1}-p_n\le16 for infinitely many nn.

Proof pointer

Section 3, pp. 8--12, from Propositions 1 and 2 (pp. 7--8), which are proved in Sections 6--9 (pp. 16--31); the paper credits the argument of Section 3 to Granville and Soundararajan. For a weight ΛR(n;Hk,ℓ)\Lambda_R(n;\mathcal H_k,\ell), a truncated divisor sum of the polynomial ∏i(n+hi)\prod_i(n+h_i), the two propositions give the asymptotics (3.1) and (3.2) (p. 8) of its square summed alone and against θ(n+hi)\theta(n+h_i), with R=Nϑ/2−εR=N^{\vartheta/2-\varepsilon}. Comparing ∑iθ(n+hi)\sum_i\theta(n+h_i) with log⁡3N\log 3N against the square of the weight on (N,2N](N,2N] yields the condition (3.4) (p. 9), which holds for some kk and ℓ\ell whenever ϑ>1/2\vartheta>1/2 by letting k,ℓ→∞k,\ell\to\infty with ℓ=o(k)\ell=o(k); this proves the first part. Taking ℓ=1\ell=1, k=7k=7 needs only ϑ>20/21\vartheta>20/21 (p. 9). For k=6k=6 the weight is replaced by a linear combination of the ΛR(n;Hk,ℓ)\Lambda_R(n;\mathcal H_k,\ell) for ℓ≤L\ell\le L, which turns the problem into one about a positive eigenvalue of a quadratic form (pp. 11--12); with L=1L=1 the condition becomes ϑ>4(8−19)/15=0.97096…\vartheta>4(8-\sqrt{19})/15=0.97096\ldots (display (3.16), p. 12). Tables on pp. 9 and 12 list the resulting values of C(ϑ)C(\vartheta).

Dependencies

Propositions 1 and 2 of the paper (pp. 7--8) and the lemmas of Sections 5 and 8. Read depth: claims checked; the statement and display (1.7) were read clause by clause on p. 2, and Section 3 for the structure of the proof.

Bears on

No Erdős problem is linked from this page. Theorem 2 is the paper's unconditional result on small gaps.