17

I am looking for a comment, reference, remark, or proof of three conjectures as follows:

Conjecture 1: Let $x$ be an odd positive integer. Then there exist two integers $n, m \ge 2$ so that $$x=P_{n+m}-P_n-P_m,$$ where $P_n$ is the $n^{th}$ prime.

My calculations the conjecture 1 true for $x=1, 3,\dotsc, 10^7-1$ and $x = 5.4371349x10^7$, $\cdots, 5.4375349x10^7$

A general of the conjecture above as follows (but weaker):

Let every integer $r_0$ exist positive integer $x_0$ such that every odd number $x \ge x_0$ has the form $x=P_{n+m+r_0}-P_n-P_m$, where $m, n \ge 2$ (PS: inspired from the comment of Lev Borisov be low)

Or simpler:

Conjecture 2: Is every odd positive integer of the form $P_{c}-P_a-P_b$ ?

See also:

A stronger comjecture 2

Conjecture 3 (Maillet's conjecture) Is every even positive integer of the form $P_{a}-P_b$

I have just computed the conjecture 3 is true with $x=2, 4, \cdots, 10^6$ and $3873$ numbers $x = $$9.82197492x10^8$$,$ $\cdots$$,$ $9.82226054x10^8$

Example:

$2=5-3$;

$4=7-3$;

$6=13-7$;

$8=13-5$;

$10=17-7$

See also:

  • 2
    You might as well assume that $m \geq 2$, since otherwise $x$ is even. – Stanley Yao Xiao Jun 28 '18 at 11:13
  • 11
    Why the "computer science" tag? Why the "prime ideals" tag? You know, there's no law that says you must use five tags – you're allowed to use fewer. – Gerry Myerson Jun 28 '18 at 13:06
  • I’m sorry, I think the result can checked by Computer – Đào Thanh Oai Jun 28 '18 at 13:35
  • So what values of n and m gave rise to the x that is 10^7-1? Gerhard "Suspect A Typo In Exponent" Paseman, 2018.06.28. – Gerhard Paseman Jun 28 '18 at 15:13
  • I am sorry, I didn't print $m, n$ so please waiting me. @GerhardPaseman – Đào Thanh Oai Jun 28 '18 at 15:31
  • 4
    Conjectures on prime constellations should imply this is possible even with $m=2$. – Wojowu Jun 28 '18 at 16:36
  • 2
    @GerhardPaseman When You ask, it is 1 AM in my country, I was going to sleep. So now the answer. Click link as follows to view. In the file, I define that. $Amn=P_{m+n}, Am=P_{m}, An=P_n, C=P_{m+n}-P_m-P_n$ the answer in this text file – Đào Thanh Oai Jun 29 '18 at 01:27
  • 2
    Thank you. I prefer to just have a single pair of values. In the meantime, I have convinced myself that m and n exist and should not be much larger than 10^7. Gerhard "Thanks Again For Your Link" Paseman, 2018.06.30. – Gerhard Paseman Jun 30 '18 at 23:10
  • 3
    Indeed it seems that there is no need to link to a text file to give the simply stated answer to @GerhardPaseman's question. As your file indicates, $m = 6787300$ and $n = 6787562$ (not much larger than $10^7$, for reasonable values of "not much larger"), so $P_m = 118988791$, $P_n = 118993759$, and $P_{m + n} = 247982549$. – LSpice Jul 01 '18 at 16:20
  • Yes, there are many numbers $m, n$ so that $P_{m+n}-Pm-P_n=10^7-1$ – Đào Thanh Oai Jul 01 '18 at 16:25
  • "Is every odd integer..." would be a version of the title more consistent with the question. –  Jul 02 '18 at 01:24
  • Yes, thank You very much. I edited again. I have just checked this true with x=1, 3,....12342955 @MattF. – Đào Thanh Oai Jul 02 '18 at 03:26
  • 2
    I agree Wojowu's comment: Conjectures on prime constellations should imply this is possible even with $m=2$. – Zhi-Wei Sun Jul 02 '18 at 05:06
  • @Zhi-WeiSun Thank You very much, but with m=2 it is very difficulte checked with $x$ large. I have a algorithm to fast checked this result. If You can help me I will comunication with You. – Đào Thanh Oai Jul 02 '18 at 05:10
  • @Zhi-WeiSun Can I publish this conjecture on your journal? – Đào Thanh Oai Jul 02 '18 at 08:06
  • 3
    @MattF., that was my edit in the title, and I forgot the old maxim that 'any' should never be used as a quantifier, because it can easily be read both as 'every' and as 'some'. I agree that the current title is better. – LSpice Jul 02 '18 at 12:27
  • Now I checked this is true with $x=1,3,⋯,54373881$; $(54373881 = 5.4373881*10^7)$ @Zhi-WeiSun – Đào Thanh Oai Jul 02 '18 at 17:59
  • 2
    It is a nice observation. I doubt that there is any way to find a proof, since the number of a prime is a rather fickle invariant. I suspect that if you ask about $P_{m+n+1}-P_m-P_n$ the results might be similar. It might be more reasonable to ask whether one can prove that supremum over $x$ of minimum $|a+b-c|$ for all $x=P_c-P_a-P_b$ is bounded. This is a notably weaker statement, but it seems to me to be more hopeful. – Lev Borisov Jul 02 '18 at 19:50
  • I agree that may be, every odd integer $x$ of the form $P_{m+n+1}-P_m-P_n$. Thank You for your help @LevBorisov – Đào Thanh Oai Jul 03 '18 at 00:46
  • @LevBorisov Please see the question above. I wish You are co-author of the general case, do You agree? – Đào Thanh Oai Jul 03 '18 at 07:42
  • I have just computed the conjecture 3 is true with $x=2, 4, \cdots, 10^6$ and $3873$ numbers from $[982197492$, $982197494$, $\cdots$, $982226054]$=$[9,82197492.10^8$, $\cdots$, $982226054.10^8]$ – Đào Thanh Oai Jul 03 '18 at 15:02
  • 1
    By "integer", do you mean "positive integer", or do you really mean integer? – Pierre-Yves Gaillard Jul 03 '18 at 16:41
  • I mean positive integer, can You help me correct? – Đào Thanh Oai Jul 03 '18 at 16:45
  • 1
    @ĐàoThanhOai - The usual terminology is to call elements of $\mathbb Z$ integers, and to say that an integer $n\in\mathbb Z$ is nonnegative if $n\ge0$ and positive if $n>0$. Also, if you want a user to be notified, you can use the @ symbol. – Pierre-Yves Gaillard Jul 03 '18 at 16:57
  • 2
    Just some remarks. I believe that Conjectures 1 and 3 are out of reach at present by being "binary additive problems in the primes". Conjecture 2 is straightforward by being a variant of the ternary Goldbach problem. See also the following related MO entries: https://mathoverflow.net/questions/202979/a-variant-of-the-goldbach-conjecture and https://mathoverflow.net/questions/253324/two-equivalent-statements-about-primes – GH from MO Jul 04 '18 at 11:34
  • @GHfromMO I hope that. Thank You very much – Đào Thanh Oai Jul 05 '18 at 00:54
  • @GerryMyerson Today, I see that maybe conjecture 1 equivalent to Goldbach's conjecture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldbach%27s_conjecture or Corollary of the Goldbach's conjecture, because $P_n+P_m=P_{n+m}-x=y$. Where $x$ is an odd positive integer less than $P_{n+m}$ then $y$ is an odd positive integer less $P_{n+m}$. But maybe we must prove that $P_n+P_m \le P_{m+n}$. Is my remark right? – Đào Thanh Oai Oct 31 '23 at 16:05
  • 1
    If $y$ is a sum of two primes, and a difference of two odd numbers, then $y$ is even, not odd. – Gerry Myerson Oct 31 '23 at 21:20
  • Yes, you are right. I don't know what Conjecture 1 has to do with Goldbach's conjecture, may you help me? @GerryMyerson – Đào Thanh Oai Nov 01 '23 at 01:25

2 Answers2

16

The conjecture 3 is mentioned here and here, in which it is called the Maillet conjecture.

The conjecture 2 is true.

It can be seen by rewriting $n=P_c−P_a−P_b$ as $P_a+P_b=P_c-n$, and it has a solution as long as the sets $\left\{x|x=P_a+P_b\right\}$ and $\left\{x|x=P_c-n\right\}$ have nonempty intersection. Call the two sets $X$ and $Y$ respectively, and let $A_N$ denote the elements of a set $A$ which is not greater than $N$.

We have $|X_N|=O(\frac{N}{logN})$, and a result of Montgomery and Vaughan shows that $|Y_N|≥\frac{N}{2}-CN^{1-c}$ for some $C$ and $c$. As $|X_N\cup Y_N|≤\frac{N}{2}+n$ and $|X_N|+|Y_N|≥\frac{N}{2}+n$ for sufficiently large $N$, it turns out that the two sets have nonempty intersection.

LeechLattice
  • 9,421
2

This isn't an answer to conjecture 1, just an elaboration of things others mentioned.

There is every reason to think that the answer to conjecture 1 is yes and even that for fixed $m \gt 1$ we have that for each odd integer $x \geq 3$ there are infinitely many $n$ with $p_{n+m}-p_n-p_m=x.$ We don't know that there is even one, however we can say with good precision how the number of solutions should be expected to grow as $n \rightarrow \infty.$ Computations always (seem) to conform to this with good fidelity as far as checked. I'll explain that a bit and then point out that that fixing $m=2$ would likely not be the most fruitful way to find a solution.

So with $m=3$ and $p_3=5$ solving $p_{n+3}-p_n-5=15$ amounts to finding two primes $p_N$ and $p_n$ with

  • $p_N-p_m=20$

  • $N-m=3.$

We do not know that $p_N-p_m=20$ infinitely often. For each even integer g define $\pi_g(X)$ to be the number of pairs $(p_N,p_n)$ with $p_N-p_n=g$ and $p_N \leq X.$ Then $\pi_2(X)$ is the number of twin primes up to $X$ We don't know that this grows without bound but can expect that it is assymptotic (in some sense which could be made precise) to $C_2\frac{X}{\ln^2X}$ and that the constant $C_2=\prod_p(1-\frac1{(p-1)^2})$ with the product over the odd primes.

There is a similar constant $C_g$ for each even $g.$ Namely $C_g=C_2\prod_p\frac{p-1}{p-2}$ where the product is over odd primes which divide $g.$

So $p_n+20$ is expected to be prime more often that $p_2$ but about as often as $p+10.$ i.e. $\pi_{20}(X) \sim \pi_{10}(X)\sim \frac{4}{3}\pi_2(X).$ That is a prediction which holds up quite well as far as checked.

For an amazing exposition of this read Heuristic Reasoning In The Theory of Numbers by Polya.

But our goal had an extra condition. Want something like to have

$p_n,p_n+6,p_n+14,p_n+20$ to all be prime but $p_n+h$ be composite for $h=2,4,8,10,12,16,18.$ It is possible to similarly predict how often that happens up to $X.$ Summing over finite number of cases would give a prediction for the number of solutions of the given problem.

$m=2$ is a little easier but I wanted to use a different value.

But where is it most fruitful to look for solutions to $p_{n+m}-p_n-p_m=x$?

Here is a graph for $p_{n+m}-p_n-p_m=101$ with $n+m\lt 200.$

I find $168$ solutions. here is a graph. enter image description here

Of the $168$ solutions, $61$ of them have $m \in\{34,35,36,37,38\}$ and the ratio $\frac{n}{m}$ ranges from $3$ to $5.2$

Using $p_k \sim {k}{\ln{k}}$ one might be able to argue that for fixed $r=\frac{n}{m}$ ( really $r$ in some small range like $[3,5]$) there is a narrow range of $m$ values that would be worth searching first. Perhaps the best $r$ (given $x$) could be estimated. I would have guessed $r \sim 1$ is best, but that seems not to be the case based on this one computation. Perhaps the optimal range is past $m+n=200.$