2
$\begingroup$

Let us call $k$-tuple $(n+1,n+2,..,n+k)$ a factorazy $k$-tuple if we have $p(n+1)<p(n+2)<\cdots<p(n+k)$ where $p(m)$ denotes biggest prime factor of $m$.

I would like to know:

Is it true that for every $k \in \mathbb N \setminus \{1\}$ there exists at least one factorazy $k$-tuple? If not, what is the maximal value of $k$? For which $k$´s there exist an infinite number of factorazy $k$-tuples? What is known about this topic?

$\endgroup$
6
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ $p(n)$ is tabulated at oeis.org/A006530 with a link to a listing up to $n=100,000$. $p(8)<\cdots<p(11)$; $p(90)<\cdots<p(94)$; $p(168)<\cdots<p(173)$. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 22, 2017 at 23:08
  • $\begingroup$ @GerryMyerson Do you expect $k$-factorazy tuples to exist for every $k$? $\endgroup$
    – user114642
    Commented Sep 23, 2017 at 1:25
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Honestly, my opinions on such a question are worth nothing. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 23, 2017 at 4:28
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Smallest $m$ such that $p(m)<\cdots<p(m+k-1)$ are tabulated at oeis.org/A100384, e.g., $p(256994754033)<\cdots<p(256994754047)$. oeis.org/A079749 is closely related. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 23, 2017 at 4:37
  • $\begingroup$ The question is very close to, perhaps a duplicate of, mathoverflow.net/questions/261640/… $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 23, 2017 at 4:41

2 Answers 2

5
$\begingroup$

The $k=3$ case is solved in Erdos & Pomerance, On the largest prime factors of $n$ and $n+1$, Aequationes Mathematicae 17 (1978) 311-321, available here. The solution is short enough to give here in its entirety. Let $P(n)$ be the largest prime factor of $n$, let $p$ be an odd prime, and $$k_0=\inf\{\,k:P(p^{2^k}+1)>p\,\}$$ (note that $P(p^{2^{k_0}}+1)\equiv1\bmod{2^{k_0+1}}$, so $k_0<\infty$). Then $$P(p^{2^{k_0}}-1)<P(p^{2^{k_0}})<P(p^{2^{k_0}}+1)$$ and we're done.

Some variants are discussed elsewhere in the paper, and also at B46 in Guy, Unsolved Problems in Number Theory, 3rd edition.

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

If we assume the prime $k$-tuples conjecture, then there are infinitely many such tuples for any fixed $k$. To see this, consider the $k$ polynomials with integer coefficients: $$ k!x-1, \quad\frac{k!}2x-1, \quad\frac{k!}3x-1, \quad\dots\quad, \frac{k!}kx-1. $$ The product of these polynomials has no common prime factor (check $x=0$), so conjecturally there are infinitely many integers $x$ such that the above expressions are simultaneously prime. But then $$ k!x-1, \quad k!x-2 = 2\bigg( \frac{k!}2x-1 \bigg), \quad k!x-3 = 3\bigg( \frac{k!}3x-1 \bigg), \quad\dots $$ form such a tuple (with, I guess, $n=k!x-k-1$).

Of course the infinitude of primes proves that there are infinitely many such $2$-tuples. I don't know offhand whether the $k=3$ case is known, although it doesn't seem out of the question.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ k=3 would follow if there is an infinite number of Mersenne primes of the form 6m-5 and if we agree that 1 is prime (in this context) $\endgroup$
    – user114642
    Commented Sep 22, 2017 at 23:14

You must log in to answer this question.