Skip to main content
edited tags
Link
Martin Sleziak
  • 4.7k
  • 4
  • 35
  • 40
Became Hot Network Question
Post Reopened by Joseph Van Name, Gro-Tsen, Yemon Choi, Sean Lawton, Gerry Myerson
Post Closed as "Not suitable for this site" by Peter Humphries, Anthony Quas, Wojowu, Tony Huynh, Felipe Voloch
Source Link
Q_p
  • 1k
  • 5
  • 19

Why shouldn't this prove the Prime Number Theorem?

Denote by $\mu$ the Mobius function. It is known that for every integer $k>1$, the number $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{\mu(n)}{n^k}$ can be interpreted as the probability that a randomly chosen integer is $k$-free.

Letting $k\rightarrow 1^+$, why shouldn't this entail the Prime Number Theorem in the form

$$\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{\mu(n)}{n}=0,$$

since the probability that an integer is ``$1$-free'' is zero ?