Is it true, that $\forall x \in \mathbb N, \pi(x+200)-\pi(x) \leq 50 $ ?

$$\pi(x)=\text{card}(\{n \in [0,x] \cap \mathbb N, n\text{ is prime}\})$$



Up to $207$ there are $46$ primes. Hence, the inequality is true for $x \le 7$.

Let $$\pi_{210}(x) = \textrm{card}(\{n \in [0,x] \cap \mathbb{N}, \, \gcd(n,210)=1\}).$$ For $x>7$, $\pi(x+200)-\pi(x) \le \pi_{210}(x+200)-\pi_{210}(x)$. Since $\pi_{210}$ is $210$-periodic, it is enough to verify that $\pi_{210}(x+200)-\pi_{210}(x) \le 50$ for $x \le 210$, which can be done by hand or by computer. Here is SageMath code:

L = [int(gcd(i,210)==1) for i in range(420)]

max(sum([numpy.array(L[i:][:210]) for i in range(200)]))

and the last line outputs $47$. So the bound can be improved to this number.

The number $210=2 \times 3 \times 5 \times 7$ was chosen because $\prod_{p \mid 210}(1-1/p) < 50/200$.

| cite | improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ We have $\pi(x+210)-\pi(x) \leq 48$ $\endgroup$ – Dattier Sep 2 at 11:30
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Indeed. By considering coprimality with $2310 = 2 \times 3 \times 5 \times 7 \times 11$, the same method produces $\pi(x+210)-\pi(x) \le 46$ for $x>11$; small $x$ can be checked by hand, and in fact there are cases of equality. The second Hardy-Littlewood Conjecture predicts $\pi(x+210)-\pi(x) \le \pi(210)=46$ also (for $x \ge 2$), but the general form of the conjecture is believed to be false. $\endgroup$ – Ofir Gorodetsky Sep 2 at 11:36
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ for x=1, we have $\pi(211)-\pi(1)=47$ $\endgroup$ – Dattier Sep 2 at 11:41
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes, sorry. That's the only counterexample though. $\endgroup$ – Ofir Gorodetsky Sep 2 at 11:46

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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