Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
We refute L261 in the notation of its statement. A coloring of is Schur-free when no class contains , and , with allowed. The only outside premise is the statement of the accepted claim on Problem 183, for every , used only at the statement interface. The argument is author-recorded by Plasma AI.
Lemma. Let . The map on pairs is injective, and every relation in , allowed, has the form , , with , or the same with and exchanged.
Proof. Write , and with , and . Then reads . The base-four digits of a sum of three powers of four are the multiplicities of the exponents, which are at most 3, so the multisets and coincide. Since , is or ; after exchanging and , . Then , and rules out , so and . Thus . Equal summands would need , which contradicts . Injectivity is the same digit argument applied to .
Theorem. Given the accepted statement , the claim fails for every .
Proof. Let , the largest for which the edges of have a -coloring with no monochromatic triangle; . If for every , then , which contradicts . So for every some has . Take a triangle-free -coloring of the edges of on the vertex set , and give the color of the edge . By the lemma this is well defined, and a monochromatic relation is a monochromatic triangle, so the coloring of is Schur-free. If has omitting a color, the exponents of span a triangle-free coloring with colors, so .