Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Source. Theorem 2, Section 1, p. 2 of arXiv:1607.02863v2 (30 July 2024), proof in Section 3, p. 4; read on the PDF pages in the text layer. Preprint, not published in a journal (arXiv listing checked). Notation: in lowest terms, , and for an odd prime , and .
Statement
Theorem 2 (p. 2). For every and every , each integer with
(display (2)) lies in ; conversely, every satisfies (2) for some and some .
In words: for an odd prime , divides exactly when the leading digit of in base satisfies , the numerator of . Since for every odd prime (display (1): pairing with shows ), every whose leading digit in base is lies in ; the one-digit does not, since .
Proof pointer and sketch (Section 3)
If with , then and ; the first term is with and , so and . Conversely, for write and ; if the same decomposition gives , and since this contradicts . The argument is half a page and was read through here, not independently reviewed.
Dependencies and read depth
Elementary (-adic valuations of the partial sums). Read depth: claims checked; the proof read through, not verified. As a consistency check, the criterion that if and only if divides the numerator of , the leading digit of in base , was verified here by exact arithmetic for all odd primes and all with (47,578 pairs, no exception).
Relation to Problem 291
With as on the problem page, , so and exactly when . The theorem is therefore the site's necessary and sufficient condition for an odd prime to divide (the prime never divides it, since is odd, p. 2), and its special case is the observation the site attributes to Steinerberger; with , it gives for , . This settles the second half of Problem 291. The first half asks whether infinitely often, which in this language means that avoids all the intervals (2) for all odd primes ; the theorem reduces the question to that avoidance problem but does not answer it.
Bears on. #291 (the exact criterion; the trivial half).