Variance of distribution of primes in residue classes

1996 ◽  
Vol 47 (187) ◽  
pp. 313-336 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Friedlander
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
Lucile Devin

Abstract As pointed out by Alexandre Bailleul, the paper mentioned in the title contains a mistake in Theorem 2.2. The hypothesis on the linear relation of the almost periods is not sufficient. In this note, we fix the problem and its minor consequences on other results in the same paper.


2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (4) ◽  
pp. 837-849 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucile Devin

AbstractWe generalize current known distribution results on Shanks–Rényi prime number races to the case where arbitrarily many residue classes are involved. Our method handles both the classical case that goes back to Chebyshev and function field analogues developed in the recent years. More precisely, let $\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(x;q,a)$ be the number of primes up to $x$ that are congruent to $a$ modulo $q$. For a fixed integer $q$ and distinct invertible congruence classes $a_{0},a_{1},\ldots ,a_{D}$, assuming the generalized Riemann Hypothesis and a weak version of the linear independence hypothesis, we show that the set of real $x$ for which the inequalities $\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(x;q,a_{0})>\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(x;q,a_{1})>\cdots >\unicode[STIX]{x1D70B}(x;q,a_{D})$ are simultaneously satisfied admits a logarithmic density.


1996 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 313-336 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. B. FRIEDLANDER ◽  
D. A. GOLDSTON

Mathematics ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (12) ◽  
pp. 289 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matt Visser

The gap between what we can explicitly prove regarding the distribution of primes and what we suspect regarding the distribution of primes is enormous. It is (reasonably) well-known that the Riemann hypothesis is not sufficient to prove Andrica’s conjecture: ∀n≥1, is p n + 1 - p n ≤ 1 ? However, can one at least get tolerably close? I shall first show that with a logarithmic modification, provided one assumes the Riemann hypothesis, one has p n + 1 /ln p n + 1 - p n /ln p n < 11/25; (n ≥ 1). Then, by considering more general mth roots, again assuming the Riemann hypothesis, I show that p n + 1 m - p n m < 44/(25 e[m < 2]); (n ≥ 3; m > 2). In counterpoint, if we limit ourselves to what we can currently prove unconditionally, then the only explicit Andrica-like results seem to be variants on the relatively weak results below: ln2 pn + 1 - ln2 pn < 9; ln3 pn + 1 - ln3 pn < 52; ln4 pn + 1 - ln4 pn < 991; (n ≥ 1). I shall also update the region on which Andrica’s conjecture is unconditionally verified.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document