Statement For every n > 1 there is always at least one prime p such that n

lilmoore11p8 2022-07-02 Answered
Statement For every n > 1 there is always at least one prime p such that n < p < 2 n.
I am curious to know that if I replace that 2 n by 2 n ϵ, ( ϵ > 0) then what is the inf ( ϵ ) so that the inequality still holds, meaning there is always a prime between n and 2 n ϵ
You can still ask an expert for help

Expert Community at Your Service

  • Live experts 24/7
  • Questions are typically answered in as fast as 30 minutes
  • Personalized clear answers
Learn more

Solve your problem for the price of one coffee

  • Available 24/7
  • Math expert for every subject
  • Pay only if we can solve it
Ask Question

Answers (2)

Gornil2
Answered 2022-07-03 Author has 20 answers
Three related points are worthy of mention, showing that epsilon can be close to n.

There is a result of Finsler that approximates how many primes lie between n and 2n, which is of order o(n/log(n)) as is to be expected by the Prime Number Theorem.

Literature on prime gaps will tell you the exponent delta such that there is (for sufficiently large n) at least one prime in the interval (n , n + n^delta). I think delta is less than 11/20.

Observed data suggests that n^delta can be replaced by something much smaller: for n between something like 3 and 10^14 , some function like 2(log(n))^2 works
Did you like this example?
Subscribe for all access
Ayaan Barr
Answered 2022-07-04 Author has 6 answers
Bertrand's postulate is
if n > 3 is an integer, then there always exists at least one prime number p with n < p < 2 n 2.
Thus ξ < 2 for n > 3. What if n 3?

For n = 3 , 3 < 5 < 6 ξ ξ < 1
For n = 2 , 2 < 3 < 4 ξ ξ < 1

Hence we have 0 < ξ < 1, if ε is a constant.
Did you like this example?
Subscribe for all access

Expert Community at Your Service

  • Live experts 24/7
  • Questions are typically answered in as fast as 30 minutes
  • Personalized clear answers
Learn more

You might be interested in

asked 2022-05-09
Suppose I have this boolean expression:
W'XYZ + WX'YZ + WXY'Z + WXYZ' + WXYZ
How would I go about simplifying this without using a K-map? Using K-map, the simplified form is XYZ + WXY + WXZ + WYZ. I read about the redundancy theorem somewhere, would rather not use that as well.
asked 2022-06-18
I'm trying to get an overarching understanding of the components of mathematical systems so that in my self study of each category of math I can break them down by their unique aspects, i.e. the operators they use, the major concepts they deal with (i.e. how calculus is about "change"), etc.

As far as my experience with formal math terminology goes, im rather weak, and i get utterly confused by the technicality required in formal definitions.

As a good starting point, I'd like to better understand what the difference is between an axiom, a theorem and a postulate. At my current level of knowledge i would use them interchangeably (lol), however I'm sure one is founded upon the others.

If someone could explain the logical hierarchy/relation between these three it would be greatly appreciated.
asked 2022-06-15
I have been recently studying a C.G. Hempel's article on mathematical truth and pointed out his following quotation: "Every concept of mathematics can be defined by means of Peano's three primitives,and every proposition of mathematics can be deduced from the five postulates enriched by the definitions of the non-primitive terms".

I was wondering if it is possible for someone to make a scheme illustrating the sequence of the derivation of the whole theory of mathematics being derived by these postulates.Possibly starting from natural numbers?(notice that Hempel excludes geometry)
asked 2022-08-03
Show that every two blocks have at most one vertex in common
asked 2022-08-12
Show that the proposition P:

There exists a pair of straight lines that are at constant distance from each other.

is equivalent to the Parallel Postulate Q :

If two lines are drawn which intersect a third in such a way that the sum of the inner angles on one side is less than two right angles, then the two lines inevitably must intersect each other on that side if extended far enough.

I tried to prove Q P then ¬ Q ¬ P. But for the second part, I can do nothing because as soon as the postulate is supposed to be untrue, the equivalent relation between angles no more exist, therefore it's hard to get congruent triangles as I used to do.
asked 2022-11-04
When reading about the history of Euclid's Elements, one finds a pretty length story about the Greeks and Arabs spending countless hours trying to prove Euclid's 5th Postulate.
But I've yet to come across a source stating that "this is the man who finally proved the 5th postulate!"
Has it ever been formally proven, or am I misunderstanding the issue?
asked 2022-06-29
Recall that Bertrand's postulate states that for n 2 there always exists a prime between n and 2 n. Bertrand's postulate was proved by Chebyshev. Recall also that the harmonic series
1 + 1 2 + 1 3 + 1 4 +
and the sum of the reciprocals of the primes
1 2 + 1 3 + 1 5 + 1 7 +
are divergent, while the sum
n = 0 1 n p
is convergent for all p > 1. This would lead one to conjecture something like:

For all ϵ > 0, there exists an N such that if n > N, then there exists a prime between n and ( 1 + ϵ ) n.

Question: Is this conjecture true? If it is true, is there an expression for N as a function of ϵ?

New questions