6
$\begingroup$

One strategy to prove the Prime number theorem involves removing some factors:

$$ \limsup_{x \to \infty} \underbrace{\frac{1}{x}\sum_{n \leq x} \mu(x)}_{\color{red}{A}}\leq \prod_{p \leq y} \left( 1 - \frac{1}{p}\right) \int_1^\infty \underbrace{ \frac{1}{t}\sum_{n \leq t} \mu(n)\mathbf{1}_y(n)}_{\color{blue}{B}} \times \frac{dt}{t} $$

The averages $A$ and $B$ are related since we are adding up the Möbius function on the subset of the integers whose factors $p \leq y$.

Here $\mathbf{1}_y(n) = 1$ if all the prime factors $p | n$ are less than $y$ and $0$ otherwise. Can't think of a better way of explaining this at the moment, it is called $v_y(n)$ in Daboussi's paper.

Proving that $\int_1^\infty \dots \ll \log y$ is rather convoluted. Are there any simpler ways to establish Daboussi's intermediate result?

$\endgroup$
2
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I don't know. Have you seen the exposition of Daboussi's proof in Tenenbaum and Mendes France, The Prime Numbers and Their Distribution, published by the AMS as Volume 6 of the Student Mathematical Library? $\endgroup$ Oct 1, 2015 at 1:10
  • $\begingroup$ I think that while it is true that Daboussi’s proof is a nice application of what someone called ‘phipsiology’ (counting numbers without small/large prime factors), there is no way around the observation that Selberg’s elementary proof is simpler and easier to understand. $\endgroup$
    – M Mueger
    Apr 21, 2019 at 8:46

0

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.