Erdős–Moser equation

From testwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Template:Short description Template:Unsolved In number theory, the Erdős–Moser equation is

1k+2k+⋯+(m−1)k=mk,

where Template:Mvar and Template:Mvar are restricted to the positive integers—that is, it is considered as a Diophantine equation. The only known solution is Template:Math, and Paul Erdős conjectured that no further solutions exist. Any further solutions must have Template:Math.[1]

Throughout this article, Template:Mvar refers exclusively to prime numbers.

Constraints on solutions

In 1953, Leo Moser proved that, in any further solutions,[2]

  1. Template:Mvar is even,
  2. Template:Math implies Template:Math,
  3. Template:Math implies Template:Math,
  4. Template:Math implies Template:Math,
  5. Template:Math is squarefree,
  6. Template:Math is either squarefree or 4 times an odd squarefree number,
  7. Template:Math is squarefree,
  8. Template:Math is squarefree,
  9. ∑p|(m−1)m−1p≡−1(modm−1),
  10. ∑p|(m+1)m+1p≡−2(modm+1)(if m+1 is even),
  11. ∑p|(2m−1)2m−1p≡−2(mod2m−1),
  12. ∑p|(2m+1)2m+1p≡−4(mod2m+1), and
  13. Template:Math.

In 1966, it was additionally shown that[3]

  1. Template:Math, and
  2. Template:Math cannot be prime.

In 1994, it was shown that[4]

  1. [[Least common multiple|Template:Math]] divides Template:Mvar,
  2. Template:Math, where Template:Math is the 2-adic valuation of Template:Mvar; equivalently, Template:Math,
  3. for any odd prime Template:Mvar dividing Template:Mvar, we have Template:Math,
  4. any prime factor of Template:Mvar must be irregular and > 10000.

In 1999, Moser's method was refined to show that Template:Math.[5]

In 2002, it was shownTemplate:R that Template:Mvar must be a multiple of Template:Math, where the symbol Template:Mvar indicates the primorial; that is, Template:Math is the product of all prime numbers Template:Math. This number exceeds Template:Math.

In 2009, it was shown that Template:Math must be a convergent of [[Natural logarithm of 2|Template:Math]]; in what the authors of that paper call "one of very few instances where a large scale computation of a numerical constant has an application", it was then determined that Template:Math.[1]

In 2010, it was shown that[6]

  1. Template:Math and Template:Math, and
  2. Template:Math has at least 4,990,906 prime factors, none of which are repeated.

The number 4,990,906 arises from the fact that Template:Math where Template:Math is the Template:Mvarth prime number.

Moser's method

First, let Template:Mvar be a prime factor of Template:Math. Leo Moser showed[2] that this implies that Template:Math divides Template:Mvar and that Template:NumBlk which upon multiplying by Template:Mvar yields

p+m−1≡0(modp2).

This in turn implies that Template:Math must be squarefree. Furthermore, since nontrivial solutions have Template:Math and since all squarefree numbers in this range must have at least one odd prime factor, the assumption that Template:Math divides Template:Mvar implies that Template:Mvar must be even.

One congruence of the form (Template:EquationNote) exists for each prime factor Template:Mvar of Template:Math. Multiplying all of them together yields

∏p|(m−1)(1+m−1p)≡0(modm−1).

Expanding out the product yields

1+∑p|(m−1)m−1p+(higher-order terms)≡0(modm−1),

where the higher-order terms are products of multiple factors of the form Template:Math, with different values of Template:Mvar in each factor. These terms are all divisible by Template:Math, so they all drop out of the congruence, yielding

1+∑p|(m−1)m−1p≡0(modm−1).

Dividing out the modulus yields Template:NumBlk Similar reasoning yields the congruences Template:NumBlk Template:NumBlk Template:NumBlk

The congruences (Template:EquationNote), (Template:EquationNote), (Template:EquationNote), and (Template:EquationNote) are quite restrictive; for example, the only values of Template:Math which satisfy (Template:EquationNote) are 3, 7, and 43, and these are ruled out by (Template:EquationNote).

We now split into two cases: either Template:Math is even, or it is odd.

In the case that Template:Math is even, adding the left-hand sides of the congruences (Template:EquationNote), (Template:EquationNote), (Template:EquationNote), and (Template:EquationNote) must yield an integer, and this integer must be at least 4. Furthermore, the Euclidean algorithm shows that no prime Template:Math can divide more than one of the numbers in the set Template:Math, and that 2 and 3 can divide at most two of these numbers. Letting Template:Math, we then have Template:NumBlk Since there are no nontrivial solutions with Template:Math, the part of the LHS of (Template:EquationNote) outside the sigma cannot exceed Template:Math; we therefore have

∑p|M1p>3.16.

Therefore, if ∑p≤x1p<3.16, then M>∏p≤xp. In Moser's original paper,[2] bounds on the prime-counting function are used to observe that

∑p≤1071p<3.16.

Therefore, Template:Mvar must exceed the product of the first 10,000,000 primes. This in turn implies that Template:Math in this case.

In the case that Template:Math is odd, we cannot use (Template:EquationNote), so instead of (Template:EquationNote) we obtain

1m−1+22m−1+42m+1+∑p|N1p≥3−13=2.666...,

where Template:Math. On the surface, this appears to be a weaker condition than (Template:EquationNote), but since Template:Math is odd, the prime 2 cannot appear on the greater side of this inequality, and it turns out to be a stronger restriction on Template:Mvar than the other case.

Therefore, any nontrivial solutions have Template:Math.

In 1999, this method was refined by using computers to replace the prime-counting estimates with exact computations; this yielded the bound Template:Math.Template:R

Bounding the ratio Template:Math

Let Template:Math. Then the Erdős–Moser equation becomes Template:Math.

Method 1: Integral comparisons

By comparing the sum Template:Math to definite integrals of the function Template:Math, one can obtain the bounds Template:Math.Template:R

The sum Template:Math is the upper Riemann sum corresponding to the integral ∫0m−1xkdx in which the interval has been partitioned on the integer values of Template:Mvar, so we have

Sk(m)>∫0m−1xkdx.

By hypothesis, Template:Math, so

mk>(m−1)k+1k+1,

which leads to Template:NumBlk Similarly, Template:Math is the lower Riemann sum corresponding to the integral ∫1mxkdx in which the interval has been partitioned on the integer values of Template:Mvar, so we have

Sk(m)≤∫1mxkdx.

By hypothesis, Template:Math, so

mk≤mk+1−1k+1<mk+1k+1,

and so Template:NumBlk Applying this to (Template:EquationNote) yields

mk+1<(1+1m−1)m=(1+1m−1)m−1⋅(mm−1)<e⋅mm−1.

Computation shows that there are no nontrivial solutions with Template:Math, so we have

mk+1<e⋅1111−1<3.

Combining this with (Template:EquationNote) yields Template:Math, as desired.

Method 2: Algebraic manipulations

The upper bound Template:Math can be reduced to Template:Math using an algebraic method:Template:R

Let Template:Mvar be a positive integer. Then the binomial theorem yields

(ℓ+1)r+1=∑i=0r+1(r+1i)ℓr+1−i.

Summing over Template:Mvar yields

∑ℓ=1m−1(ℓ+1)r+1=∑ℓ=1m−1(∑i=0r+1(r+1i)ℓr+1−i).

Reindexing on the left and rearranging on the right yields

∑ℓ=2mℓr+1=∑i=0r+1(r+1i)∑ℓ=1m−1ℓr+1−i
∑ℓ=1mℓr+1=1+∑i=0r+1(r+1i)Sr+1−i(m)
Sr+1(m+1)−Sr+1(m)=1+(r+1)Sr(m)+∑i=2r+1(r+1i)Sr+1−i(m)

Template:NumBlk Taking Template:Math yields

mk+1=1+(k+1)Sk(m)+∑i=2k+1(k+1i)Sk+1−i(m).

By hypothesis, Template:Math, so

mk+1=1+(k+1)mk+∑i=2k+1(k+1i)Sk+1−i(m)

Template:NumBlk Since the RHS is positive, we must therefore have Template:NumBlk Returning to (Template:EquationNote) and taking Template:Math yields

mk=1+k⋅Sk−1(m)+∑i=2k(ki)Sk−i(m)
mk=1+∑s=1k(ks)Sk−s(m).

Substituting this into (Template:EquationNote) to eliminate Template:Math yields

(1+∑s=1k(ks)Sk−s(m))(m−(k+1))=1+∑i=2k+1(k+1i)Sk+1−i(m).

Reindexing the sum on the right with the substitution Template:Math yields

(1+∑s=1k(ks)Sk−s(m))(m−(k+1))=1+∑s=1k(k+1s+1)Sk−s(m)
m−(k+1)+(m−(k+1))∑s=1k(ks)Sk−s(m)=1+∑s=1kk+1s+1(ks)Sk−s(m)

Template:NumBlk We already know from (Template:EquationNote) that Template:Math. This leaves open the possibility that Template:Math; however, substituting this into (Template:EquationNote) yields

0=∑s=1k(k+1s+1−1)(ks)Sk−s(k+2)
0=∑s=1kk−ss+1(ks)Sk−s(k+2)
0=k−kk+1(kk)Sk−k(k+2)+∑s=1k−1k−ss+1(ks)Sk−s(k+2)
0=0+∑s=1k−1k−ss+1(ks)Sk−s(k+2),

which is impossible for Template:Math, since the sum contains only positive terms. Therefore, any nontrivial solutions must have Template:Math; combining this with (Template:EquationNote) yields

k+2<m.

We therefore observe that the left-hand side of (Template:EquationNote) is positive, so Template:NumBlk Since Template:Math, the sequence {(k+1)/(s+1)−m+(k+1)}s=1∞ is decreasing. This and (Template:EquationNote) together imply that its first term (the term with Template:Math) must be positive: if it were not, then every term in the sum would be nonpositive, and therefore so would the sum itself. Thus,

0<k+11+1−m+(k+1),

which yields

m<32⋅(k+1)

and therefore

mk+1<32,

as desired.

Continued fractions

Any potential solutions to the equation must arise from the continued fraction of the natural logarithm of 2: specifically, Template:Math must be a convergent of that number.[1]

By expanding the Taylor series of Template:Math about Template:Math, one finds

(1−y)k=e−ky(1−k2y2−k3y3+k(k−2)8y4+k(5k−6)30y5+O(y6))as y→0.

More elaborate analysis sharpens this to Template:NumBlk for Template:Math and Template:Math.

The Erdős–Moser equation is equivalent to

1=∑j=1m−1(1−jm)k.

Applying (Template:EquationNote) to each term in this sum yields

T0−k2m2T2−k3m3T3+k(k−2)8m4T4+k(5k−6)30m5T5−k36m6T6<∑j=1m−1(1−jm)k<T0−k2m2T2−k3m3T3+k(k−2)8m4T4+k22m5T5,

where Tn=∑j=1m−1jnzj and Template:Math. Further manipulation eventually yields Template:NumBlk We already know that Template:Math is bounded as Template:Math; making the ansatz Template:Math, and therefore Template:Math, and substituting it into (Template:EquationNote) yields

1−1ec−1=O(1m)as m→∞;

therefore Template:Math. We therefore have Template:NumBlk and so

1z=ek/m=2+2am+a2+2bm2+O(1m3)as m→∞.

Substituting these formulas into (Template:EquationNote) yields Template:Math and Template:Math. Putting these into (Template:EquationNote) yields

km=ln⁡(2)(1−32m−2512−3ln⁡(2)m2+O(1m3))as m→∞.

The term Template:Math must be bounded effectively. To that end, we define the function

F(x,λ)=(1−1t−1+xλ2t+t2(t−1)3+x2λ3t+4t2+t3(t−1)4−x2λ(λ−2x)8t+11t2+11t3+t4(t−1)5)|t=eλ.

The inequality (Template:EquationNote) then takes the form Template:NumBlk and we further have

F(x,ln⁡(2)(1−32x−0.004x2))>−0.00515x2−100x3andF(x,ln⁡(2)(1−32x−0.004x2))<−0.00015x2+100x3

for Template:Math. Therefore

F(1m,ln⁡(2)(1−32m−0.004m2))>−110000m3for m>2202⋅104andF(1m,ln⁡(2)(1−32m−0.004m2))<−110000m3for m>0734⋅106.

Comparing these with (Template:EquationNote) then shows that, for Template:Math, we have

ln⁡(2)(1−32m−0.004m2)<km<ln⁡(2)(1−32m),

and therefore

0<ln⁡(2)−2k2m−3<0.0111(2m−3)2.

Recalling that Moser showed[2] that indeed Template:Math, and then invoking Legendre's theorem on continued fractions, finally proves that Template:Math must be a convergent to Template:Math. Leveraging this result, 31 billion decimal digits of Template:Math can be used to exclude any nontrivial solutions below Template:Math.[1]

See also

Template:Portal

References

  1. ↑ Template:Cite thesis Cite error: <ref> tag with name "kellner2002" defined in <references> is not used in prior text.
  2. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 Template:Cite journal
  3. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 Template:Cite journal
  4. ↑ Template:Cite journal
  5. ↑ Template:Cite journal
  6. ↑ Template:Cite journal
  7. ↑ Template:Cite journal