MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

The primary motivation for this question is the following: I would like to extract some topological statistics which capture how arithmetic progressions of prime numbers "fit together" in a manner that will be made precise below.

Setup

Consider a nested family of simplicial complexes $K(p)$ indexed by prime $p \in \mathbb N$ defined as follows:

  1. the vertices are all odd primes less than or equal to $p$, and
  2. insert a $d$-simplex ($d \geq 2$) spanning $d+1$ vertices if and only if they constitute an arithmetic progression. Of course, one must also insert all faces, and faces-of-faces etc. so that the defining property of a simplicial complex is preserved.

For instance, $K(7)$ has the vertices $3,5,7$ and a single $2$-simplex $(3,5,7)$ along with all its faces. $K(11)$ has all this, plus the vertex $11$ and the simplex $(3,7,11)$. The edge $(3,7)$ already exists so only the other two need to be added. Thus, the fact that $(3,7)$ occurs in two arithmetic progressions bounded by $11$ is encoded by placing the corresponding edge in the boundary of two 2-simplices.

Question

Has someone already defined and studied this complex? What I am mostly interested in is

How does the homology of $K(p)$ change with $p$?

If it helps, here are -- according to home-brew computations -- the statistics for the first few primes (Betti 0 and 1 over $\mathbb{Z}_2$). I've already confirmed that the sequence of Betti-1's is not in Sloane's online encyclopedia of integer sequences. If an intermediate K[p] is missing in the list, that means that the homology is the same as that for the previous prime.

K [3]: 1 0
K [5]: 2 0
K [7]: 1 0
K [13]: 2 0
K [17]: 2 1
K [19]: 1 2
K [23]: 1 4
K [31]: 1 6
K [37]: 2 6
K [43]: 1 7
K [53]: 1 8
K [59]: 1 9
K [61]: 1 10
K [67]: 1 12
K [71]: 1 17
K [73]: 1 20
K [79]: 1 23
K [83]: 1 26
K [89]: 1 31
K [97]: 1 32
K [101]: 1 35
K [103]: 1 41
K [107]: 1 43
K [109]: 1 47
K [113]: 1 53
K [127]: 1 58
K [131]: 1 62
K [137]: 1 67
K [139]: 1 73
K [149]: 1 78

Here's a more concrete question:

Is it true that the $d$-dimensional homology groups of $K(p)$ for $d > 1$ are always trivial?

share|cite|improve this question
4  
"The primary motivation for this question...." Was that a pun? – Gerry Myerson Aug 5 '12 at 22:44
12  
Gerry: sadly, yes. I fear that my sense of humor is progressively deteriorating... – Vidit Nanda Aug 5 '12 at 22:49
2  
This way of constructing complexes must be interesting for sequences of integers other than primes, too! – David Corwin Aug 5 '12 at 22:59
12  
@David: you mean like this? arxiv.org/abs/1101.5704 – Vidit Nanda Aug 5 '12 at 23:01
5  
Regarding connectedness of the inf. complex: if I did not overlook something stupid, it is 'clear' (in the sense that 'everybody' believes it but nobody can prove it) that for any tow odd primes q1,q2 there will be a prime p (indeed infinitely many) such that q1,p and q2,p can each be completed to a 3-AP of primes. In other words for q1,q2 fixed there will be a prime p such that 2p -q1 and 2p -q2 are both prime. More generally any system of linear equations is believed to be solvable 'in the primes', except if there is a 'local' obstruction (congr. or size), and for some this can be shown. – user9072 Aug 6 '12 at 11:32

No. In fact, for $p = 435052917615787$, this will absolutely be false, as the second homology group will not vanish.

Note that a 2-dimensional "hole" in your complex is a 3-simplex all of whose faces are 2-simplices in $K(p)$, i.e. 4 primes such that each 3 of them lie in some arithmetic progression.

Of course, you would suspect that such a thing is plausible, and with some effort construct an example. Here's why this number works:

Consider $p = 398936189798617$. Then, if $d = 2124513401010$, one sees that $p+d$ is not a prime, while $p+2d,p+3d,\ldots,p+15d$ are all primes. Here $p+15d = 435052917615787$ is the prime for which we consider the complex.

In fact, the numbers were taken from the AP-k records at http://primerecords.dk/aprecords.htm#minimal, and $p+2d$ is just a beginning of an AP-23.

Now, one sees immediately that $p, p+6d, p+10d$ form a simplex, as it is a subsequence of the arithmetic progression of primes $p, p+2d, p+4d, p+6d, p+10d$.

Similarly, $p, p+6d, p+15d$ form a simplex, as do $p, p+10d, p+15d$ and $p+6d, p+10d, p+15d$. These come from sequences with differences $3d$, $5d$, and $d$ respectively.

However, $p,p+6d,p+10d,p+15d$ can only form a simplex if they all lie in some arithmetic progression of primes. But then its difference must divide $d$, contradicting the fact that $p+d$ is not prime.

share|cite|improve this answer
2  
Thanks! The numbers involved are huge. So maybe this is also a good candidate answer to the big list question somewhere on this site asking about "eventual counterexamples" – Vidit Nanda Mar 5 at 2:14
1  
This of course leads to the (harder) question: what is the smallest $p$ for which the second homology group of $K(p)$ is nontrivial? – Greg Martin Mar 5 at 7:50

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.