Is this approach valid for using least common multiple to establish Bertrand's postulate











up vote
2
down vote

favorite
1












Let $text{lcm}(x)$ be the least common multiple of ${1,2,3,dots,x}$.



Denis Hanson showed that $text{lcm}(x) < 3^x$ and M. Nair showed that $text{lcm}(x) > 2^x$.



Neither used Bertrand's Postulate in their result. Hanson later showed that there is always a prime between $3n$ and $4n$ without using Nair's result.



The argument for Bertrand's Postulate depends on the following idea:




$$text{lcm}(sqrt{2x})frac{2x#}{x#}ge frac{text{lcm}(2x)}{text{lcm}(x)}$$



where $2x#$ and $x#$ are the primorial for $2x$ and for $x$.




Here is the argument:




  • If a prime $sqrt{2x}<ple x$, then it cancels out in $dfrac{text{lcm}(2x)}{text{lcm}(x)}$.


  • If a prime $x < p le 2x$, then it divides $dfrac{2x#}{x#}$.


  • If $a ge 2$ and $x < p^a le 2x$, then $p^{a-1} < dfrac{x}{p} < x$ and it divides out and $p^{a+1} > 2x$.


  • The lemma follows.



Here is the argument for Bertrand's Postulate:



(1) From Hanson and Nair:



$$frac{text{lcm}(2x)}{text{lcm}(x)} > frac{2^{2x}}{3^{x}} = left(frac{4}{3}right)^x$$



(2) Assume that there is no prime between $2x$ and $x$.



(3) Then we have the following:



$$3^{sqrt{2x}} > text{lcm}(sqrt{2x})frac{2x#}{x#} > left(frac{4}{3}right)^x$$



(4) Which simplifies to:



$$frac{ln(4)}{ln(3)} < frac{x+sqrt{2x}}{x}$$



which is invalid for $x ge 30$ since:



$$frac{ln(4)}{ln(3)} > 1.26 > frac{30+sqrt{60}}{30} approx 1.258$$



and



$$frac{d}{dx}left(frac{x+sqrt{2x}}{x}right) = -frac{1}{sqrt{2}x^{3/2}}$$



Am I wrong?










share|cite|improve this question
























  • The result of Nair is that $ngeq 7implies lcm(n)>2^n$, as stated in your link.
    – DanielWainfleet
    Nov 17 at 8:16

















up vote
2
down vote

favorite
1












Let $text{lcm}(x)$ be the least common multiple of ${1,2,3,dots,x}$.



Denis Hanson showed that $text{lcm}(x) < 3^x$ and M. Nair showed that $text{lcm}(x) > 2^x$.



Neither used Bertrand's Postulate in their result. Hanson later showed that there is always a prime between $3n$ and $4n$ without using Nair's result.



The argument for Bertrand's Postulate depends on the following idea:




$$text{lcm}(sqrt{2x})frac{2x#}{x#}ge frac{text{lcm}(2x)}{text{lcm}(x)}$$



where $2x#$ and $x#$ are the primorial for $2x$ and for $x$.




Here is the argument:




  • If a prime $sqrt{2x}<ple x$, then it cancels out in $dfrac{text{lcm}(2x)}{text{lcm}(x)}$.


  • If a prime $x < p le 2x$, then it divides $dfrac{2x#}{x#}$.


  • If $a ge 2$ and $x < p^a le 2x$, then $p^{a-1} < dfrac{x}{p} < x$ and it divides out and $p^{a+1} > 2x$.


  • The lemma follows.



Here is the argument for Bertrand's Postulate:



(1) From Hanson and Nair:



$$frac{text{lcm}(2x)}{text{lcm}(x)} > frac{2^{2x}}{3^{x}} = left(frac{4}{3}right)^x$$



(2) Assume that there is no prime between $2x$ and $x$.



(3) Then we have the following:



$$3^{sqrt{2x}} > text{lcm}(sqrt{2x})frac{2x#}{x#} > left(frac{4}{3}right)^x$$



(4) Which simplifies to:



$$frac{ln(4)}{ln(3)} < frac{x+sqrt{2x}}{x}$$



which is invalid for $x ge 30$ since:



$$frac{ln(4)}{ln(3)} > 1.26 > frac{30+sqrt{60}}{30} approx 1.258$$



and



$$frac{d}{dx}left(frac{x+sqrt{2x}}{x}right) = -frac{1}{sqrt{2}x^{3/2}}$$



Am I wrong?










share|cite|improve this question
























  • The result of Nair is that $ngeq 7implies lcm(n)>2^n$, as stated in your link.
    – DanielWainfleet
    Nov 17 at 8:16















up vote
2
down vote

favorite
1









up vote
2
down vote

favorite
1






1





Let $text{lcm}(x)$ be the least common multiple of ${1,2,3,dots,x}$.



Denis Hanson showed that $text{lcm}(x) < 3^x$ and M. Nair showed that $text{lcm}(x) > 2^x$.



Neither used Bertrand's Postulate in their result. Hanson later showed that there is always a prime between $3n$ and $4n$ without using Nair's result.



The argument for Bertrand's Postulate depends on the following idea:




$$text{lcm}(sqrt{2x})frac{2x#}{x#}ge frac{text{lcm}(2x)}{text{lcm}(x)}$$



where $2x#$ and $x#$ are the primorial for $2x$ and for $x$.




Here is the argument:




  • If a prime $sqrt{2x}<ple x$, then it cancels out in $dfrac{text{lcm}(2x)}{text{lcm}(x)}$.


  • If a prime $x < p le 2x$, then it divides $dfrac{2x#}{x#}$.


  • If $a ge 2$ and $x < p^a le 2x$, then $p^{a-1} < dfrac{x}{p} < x$ and it divides out and $p^{a+1} > 2x$.


  • The lemma follows.



Here is the argument for Bertrand's Postulate:



(1) From Hanson and Nair:



$$frac{text{lcm}(2x)}{text{lcm}(x)} > frac{2^{2x}}{3^{x}} = left(frac{4}{3}right)^x$$



(2) Assume that there is no prime between $2x$ and $x$.



(3) Then we have the following:



$$3^{sqrt{2x}} > text{lcm}(sqrt{2x})frac{2x#}{x#} > left(frac{4}{3}right)^x$$



(4) Which simplifies to:



$$frac{ln(4)}{ln(3)} < frac{x+sqrt{2x}}{x}$$



which is invalid for $x ge 30$ since:



$$frac{ln(4)}{ln(3)} > 1.26 > frac{30+sqrt{60}}{30} approx 1.258$$



and



$$frac{d}{dx}left(frac{x+sqrt{2x}}{x}right) = -frac{1}{sqrt{2}x^{3/2}}$$



Am I wrong?










share|cite|improve this question















Let $text{lcm}(x)$ be the least common multiple of ${1,2,3,dots,x}$.



Denis Hanson showed that $text{lcm}(x) < 3^x$ and M. Nair showed that $text{lcm}(x) > 2^x$.



Neither used Bertrand's Postulate in their result. Hanson later showed that there is always a prime between $3n$ and $4n$ without using Nair's result.



The argument for Bertrand's Postulate depends on the following idea:




$$text{lcm}(sqrt{2x})frac{2x#}{x#}ge frac{text{lcm}(2x)}{text{lcm}(x)}$$



where $2x#$ and $x#$ are the primorial for $2x$ and for $x$.




Here is the argument:




  • If a prime $sqrt{2x}<ple x$, then it cancels out in $dfrac{text{lcm}(2x)}{text{lcm}(x)}$.


  • If a prime $x < p le 2x$, then it divides $dfrac{2x#}{x#}$.


  • If $a ge 2$ and $x < p^a le 2x$, then $p^{a-1} < dfrac{x}{p} < x$ and it divides out and $p^{a+1} > 2x$.


  • The lemma follows.



Here is the argument for Bertrand's Postulate:



(1) From Hanson and Nair:



$$frac{text{lcm}(2x)}{text{lcm}(x)} > frac{2^{2x}}{3^{x}} = left(frac{4}{3}right)^x$$



(2) Assume that there is no prime between $2x$ and $x$.



(3) Then we have the following:



$$3^{sqrt{2x}} > text{lcm}(sqrt{2x})frac{2x#}{x#} > left(frac{4}{3}right)^x$$



(4) Which simplifies to:



$$frac{ln(4)}{ln(3)} < frac{x+sqrt{2x}}{x}$$



which is invalid for $x ge 30$ since:



$$frac{ln(4)}{ln(3)} > 1.26 > frac{30+sqrt{60}}{30} approx 1.258$$



and



$$frac{d}{dx}left(frac{x+sqrt{2x}}{x}right) = -frac{1}{sqrt{2}x^{3/2}}$$



Am I wrong?







elementary-number-theory proof-verification prime-numbers least-common-multiple






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Nov 16 at 20:50

























asked Nov 16 at 18:31









Larry Freeman

3,24721239




3,24721239












  • The result of Nair is that $ngeq 7implies lcm(n)>2^n$, as stated in your link.
    – DanielWainfleet
    Nov 17 at 8:16




















  • The result of Nair is that $ngeq 7implies lcm(n)>2^n$, as stated in your link.
    – DanielWainfleet
    Nov 17 at 8:16


















The result of Nair is that $ngeq 7implies lcm(n)>2^n$, as stated in your link.
– DanielWainfleet
Nov 17 at 8:16






The result of Nair is that $ngeq 7implies lcm(n)>2^n$, as stated in your link.
– DanielWainfleet
Nov 17 at 8:16












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
3
down vote



accepted










I think that you are right.



I think that the inequality of the idea is true, but it seems that your proof has an error. The third bullet point looks wrong since $xlt p^ale 2x$ does not imply $p^{a-1}lt frac xplt x$.



You've already dealt with the primes $p$ such that $sqrt{2x}lt ple 2x$ in the first and the second bullet points.



Let us consider the case where $$p^ale sqrt{2x}lt p^{a+1}qquadtext{and}qquad p^ble xlt p^{b+1}$$
Here, $p$ is a prime and $a,b$ are positive integers such that $ale b$.



If $a=b$. Then, we get
$$frac{p^{2a}}{2}le xlt p^{b+1}=p^{a+1}implies p^{a-1}lt 2implies a=b=1$$
So, we have
$$ple sqrt{2x}lt p^{2},qquad ple xlt p^{2},qquad p^2le 2xlt 2p^2le p^3$$
So, in this case, the inequality holds.



If $bge a+1$, then we get
$$p^{2a}le 2xlt p^{2a+2}$$
and
$$p^ap^bge p^{2a+1}ge p^{2a}$$
So, in this case, the inequality holds.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Thanks very much!
    – Larry Freeman
    Nov 17 at 12:29











Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














 

draft saved


draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3001484%2fis-this-approach-valid-for-using-least-common-multiple-to-establish-bertrands-p%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
3
down vote



accepted










I think that you are right.



I think that the inequality of the idea is true, but it seems that your proof has an error. The third bullet point looks wrong since $xlt p^ale 2x$ does not imply $p^{a-1}lt frac xplt x$.



You've already dealt with the primes $p$ such that $sqrt{2x}lt ple 2x$ in the first and the second bullet points.



Let us consider the case where $$p^ale sqrt{2x}lt p^{a+1}qquadtext{and}qquad p^ble xlt p^{b+1}$$
Here, $p$ is a prime and $a,b$ are positive integers such that $ale b$.



If $a=b$. Then, we get
$$frac{p^{2a}}{2}le xlt p^{b+1}=p^{a+1}implies p^{a-1}lt 2implies a=b=1$$
So, we have
$$ple sqrt{2x}lt p^{2},qquad ple xlt p^{2},qquad p^2le 2xlt 2p^2le p^3$$
So, in this case, the inequality holds.



If $bge a+1$, then we get
$$p^{2a}le 2xlt p^{2a+2}$$
and
$$p^ap^bge p^{2a+1}ge p^{2a}$$
So, in this case, the inequality holds.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Thanks very much!
    – Larry Freeman
    Nov 17 at 12:29















up vote
3
down vote



accepted










I think that you are right.



I think that the inequality of the idea is true, but it seems that your proof has an error. The third bullet point looks wrong since $xlt p^ale 2x$ does not imply $p^{a-1}lt frac xplt x$.



You've already dealt with the primes $p$ such that $sqrt{2x}lt ple 2x$ in the first and the second bullet points.



Let us consider the case where $$p^ale sqrt{2x}lt p^{a+1}qquadtext{and}qquad p^ble xlt p^{b+1}$$
Here, $p$ is a prime and $a,b$ are positive integers such that $ale b$.



If $a=b$. Then, we get
$$frac{p^{2a}}{2}le xlt p^{b+1}=p^{a+1}implies p^{a-1}lt 2implies a=b=1$$
So, we have
$$ple sqrt{2x}lt p^{2},qquad ple xlt p^{2},qquad p^2le 2xlt 2p^2le p^3$$
So, in this case, the inequality holds.



If $bge a+1$, then we get
$$p^{2a}le 2xlt p^{2a+2}$$
and
$$p^ap^bge p^{2a+1}ge p^{2a}$$
So, in this case, the inequality holds.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Thanks very much!
    – Larry Freeman
    Nov 17 at 12:29













up vote
3
down vote



accepted







up vote
3
down vote



accepted






I think that you are right.



I think that the inequality of the idea is true, but it seems that your proof has an error. The third bullet point looks wrong since $xlt p^ale 2x$ does not imply $p^{a-1}lt frac xplt x$.



You've already dealt with the primes $p$ such that $sqrt{2x}lt ple 2x$ in the first and the second bullet points.



Let us consider the case where $$p^ale sqrt{2x}lt p^{a+1}qquadtext{and}qquad p^ble xlt p^{b+1}$$
Here, $p$ is a prime and $a,b$ are positive integers such that $ale b$.



If $a=b$. Then, we get
$$frac{p^{2a}}{2}le xlt p^{b+1}=p^{a+1}implies p^{a-1}lt 2implies a=b=1$$
So, we have
$$ple sqrt{2x}lt p^{2},qquad ple xlt p^{2},qquad p^2le 2xlt 2p^2le p^3$$
So, in this case, the inequality holds.



If $bge a+1$, then we get
$$p^{2a}le 2xlt p^{2a+2}$$
and
$$p^ap^bge p^{2a+1}ge p^{2a}$$
So, in this case, the inequality holds.






share|cite|improve this answer












I think that you are right.



I think that the inequality of the idea is true, but it seems that your proof has an error. The third bullet point looks wrong since $xlt p^ale 2x$ does not imply $p^{a-1}lt frac xplt x$.



You've already dealt with the primes $p$ such that $sqrt{2x}lt ple 2x$ in the first and the second bullet points.



Let us consider the case where $$p^ale sqrt{2x}lt p^{a+1}qquadtext{and}qquad p^ble xlt p^{b+1}$$
Here, $p$ is a prime and $a,b$ are positive integers such that $ale b$.



If $a=b$. Then, we get
$$frac{p^{2a}}{2}le xlt p^{b+1}=p^{a+1}implies p^{a-1}lt 2implies a=b=1$$
So, we have
$$ple sqrt{2x}lt p^{2},qquad ple xlt p^{2},qquad p^2le 2xlt 2p^2le p^3$$
So, in this case, the inequality holds.



If $bge a+1$, then we get
$$p^{2a}le 2xlt p^{2a+2}$$
and
$$p^ap^bge p^{2a+1}ge p^{2a}$$
So, in this case, the inequality holds.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Nov 17 at 5:33









mathlove

91.5k881214




91.5k881214












  • Thanks very much!
    – Larry Freeman
    Nov 17 at 12:29


















  • Thanks very much!
    – Larry Freeman
    Nov 17 at 12:29
















Thanks very much!
– Larry Freeman
Nov 17 at 12:29




Thanks very much!
– Larry Freeman
Nov 17 at 12:29


















 

draft saved


draft discarded



















































 


draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3001484%2fis-this-approach-valid-for-using-least-common-multiple-to-establish-bertrands-p%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

QoS: MAC-Priority for clients behind a repeater

Ивакино (Тотемский район)

Can't locate Autom4te/ChannelDefs.pm in @INC (when it definitely is there)