Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Statement
Notation (p. 1): is the th prime, is the -fold iterated logarithm, and is the largest gap between primes up to . Rankin's bound, the paper's (1.1), is for sufficiently large; Rankin had , and the best constant before this paper was Pintz's .
Theorem 1 (p. 1).
In words: for every constant there are infinitely many with .
The form the proof gives (abstract, pp. 2 and 4). The abstract states the result for every fixed : there are consecutive primes below whose difference exceeds $t(1+o(1))(\log x)(\log\log x)(\log\log\log\log x) (\log\log\log x)^{-2}$. The reduction of Section 2 (p. 2) shows that if can be covered by classes for the primes , with and as in (2.1), then there is an interval in of length containing no primes. The proof on p. 4 gives that covering for every fixed choice of , so (1.1) holds with arbitrarily large. The paper notes (p. 1) that Ford, Green, Konyagin and Tao obtained the same result independently by a different method.
Remark (p. 1). The paper states that its method gives a quantitative improvement of (1.1), deferred to forthcoming work; no such bound is proved in the paper.
Source. J. Maynard, Large gaps between primes, Ann. of Math. (2) 183 (2016), no. 3, 915--933, doi:10.4007/annals.2016.183.3.3, read in the arXiv:1408.5110v2 preprint (28 October 2019) identified on the source card; the pages cited are the preprint's printed pages: Theorem 1 and the remark on p. 1, the reduction on p. 2, the proof of Theorem 1 from Proposition 5 on p. 4.
Read depth. Claims checked: the statement, the notation, the remark and the reduction of Section 2 were read clause by clause on the page images, and the proof of Theorem 1 assuming Proposition 5 (p. 4) was read through. The proof of Proposition 5 (pp. 4--17) was read for its structure but not checked step by step. Nothing here is independently reviewed.
Proof pointer
Pp. 1--4 and 17. The proof follows the Erdős--Rankin construction and changes only its last stage. If every integer in lies in a chosen class for some prime , the Chinese remainder theorem gives a in with composite for all ; taking gives the prime-free interval above, so it suffices to cover with arbitrarily large. With , , as in (2.1), the classes for and for leave the survivors of (2.3)--(2.4): products with prime and -smooth, and -smooth , each with no common factor with after subtracting . The set is small by Lemma 2 (p. 2), . Splitting by the even cofactor into the sets of (2.5), Lemma 4 (p. 3) bounds over by , so for small disjoint intervals of the length that Proposition 5 needs fit side by side, and that proposition covers each such with the primes of . Lemmas 2, 3 and 4 leave elements uncovered, and these are covered one at a time by primes in (p. 4). The proof of Proposition 5, completed at the top of p. 17, therefore completes the proof of Theorem 1.
Dependencies
Proposition 5 and Lemmas 2--4 of the same paper; Lemma 2 is quoted from Maier and Pomerance, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 322 (1990), Theorem 5.3 (the paper's reference [7]); Lemma 3 rests on a fundamental-lemma sieve and the Bombieri--Vinogradov theorem, citing Friedlander and Iwaniec, Opera de Cribro, Theorem 6.12 (reference [3]).
Bears on
- Problem 4: the problem asks whether for every infinitely many have . Since , each iterated logarithm of is asymptotic to that of , so Theorem 1 answers the question yes. The problem's claim page for this paper records the credit.
- Problem 1137: the problem asks whether , with the th prime gap. Theorem 1 is a lower bound for the largest single gap, the quantity squared in the denominator; it says nothing about products of two consecutive gaps and does not decide the question.