Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
On the density of certain sequences of integers
A. S. Besicovitch, "On the density of certain sequences of integers," Mathematische Annalen 110(1), 336--341 (1935). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01448032.
Write for the set of positive multiples of a set . The paper begins with the two questions suggested by primitive abundant numbers: must every primitive set have density zero, and must its set of multiples have a natural density? (Introduction, p. 336.) Its construction answers both questions negatively.
The input is the divisor-window estimate. For
and , Theorem 1 proves (§5, pp. 339--340). The proof first removes the density-zero set of integers having abnormally many divisors and then counts, over a long factorial period, how many dyadic divisor windows the remaining integers can meet; equations (5)--(8), pp. 339--340, are the quantitative core. Consequently there are arbitrarily remote windows with as small as prescribed.
In §7 (pp. 340--341), choose and positive with
then select so that and each new scale lies beyond a factorial period for the preceding window; the displayed choice on p. 340 is . Put and define
This is the block/gliding mechanism. Each fresh block is moved far enough out that the old periodic sets have settled to their small mean densities. Deleting the old multiples makes primitive: an earlier member cannot divide a later one, and a later member is too large to divide an earlier one. The deletion loses at most of a fresh block. At the same time every integer in the whole fresh block belongs to , because it is a multiple of itself; a deleted generator was already a multiple of an earlier block, which also explains .
The two cutoff subsequences force the failure of natural density. Immediately before a fresh block, at , only the old multiple sets contribute, giving
At the end of the block, , the interval is contained in , so
The paper's conclusions follow on p. 341, which the copy read lacks, so their printed form is not checked here; the construction also gives and . Thus refutes the proposed zero-density consequence of primitivity, while its multiple closure refutes natural-density existence for arbitrary sets of multiples.
For Problem 25, take the forbidden class for each . The excluded set is exactly and the survivor set is , so Besicovitch supplies a clean model of how gliding blocks can make ordinary densities oscillate. It is not a near-counterexample to E0025, which asks for logarithmic density. The later Davenport--Erdős theorem says that every set of multiples has a logarithmic density (indeed equal to its lower natural density), so both and its complement have logarithmic densities despite the ordinary-density failure.
Reading status. Claims checked for Theorem 1 and the §7 construction against the page images of printed pp. 339--340. The scan read ends with the definition of on p. 340, so the density conclusions given above for p. 341 were not checked against it; no full proof verification was undertaken.
Results to transcribe.
- Theorem 1 (§5, pp. 339--340): for , one has .
- Theorem 2 (§6, p. 340): for the stated sequence , , the analogous divisor-window densities satisfy .
- §7 construction and conclusion (pp. 340--341): there is a primitive set with lower density zero and upper density greater than , and its set of multiples has lower density below and upper density above , hence no natural density.