Erdős Problem 688: Ii
In particular, is it true that ?
Questions, not proof records
Each statement record keeps the mathematical question, a dated status source, accessible references, and any pinned Lean formulation separate from proof verification.
sorry marks an admitted statement, not a proof. Source indexing does not mean the formulation has been independently built or certified by Therefore.In particular, is it true that ?
Let n be sufficiently large. Is there some choice of congruence class a_p for all primes
2 ≤ p ≤ n such that every integer in [1,n] satisfies at least two of the congruences
≡ a_p (mod p)?
Carmichael has asked whether there is an integer for which has exactly one solution, that is \frac{f_\max(n)}{f_\min(n)} = 1.
Let be a sequence of primes such that . Is it true that
Is there a sequence of primes such that and
Erdős Problem 699.* Is it true that for every there exists a prime with ?
Erdős and Szekeres conjectured that, apart from a finite exceptional set of triples (n, i, j),
one can always take p > i in the prime divisor statement.
Is there a covering system all of whose moduli are odd (and greater than 1)?
Let and let be the largest prime dividing . (a)* Characterise those composite such that .
Erdős–Szekeres [ErSz78] note that when is a product of two primes
(erdos_700.variants.prime_mul), with a further example. The characterisation itself is
open; we state it as the (unknown) predicate that is equivalent to being such an n.
Let . (b)* Are there infinitely many composite such that ?
Erdős–Szekeres [ErSz78] could not prove this. (Since , the least prime factor of
, there are infinitely many , those of the form , with ; the
question asks for the strict inequality.) Here is written as (f n) ^ 2 > n.
Let . (c)* Is it true that, for every composite , for every ?
Erdős–Szekeres [ErSz78] prove the weaker bound (the case ).
Here is spelled out as: for every A > 0 there is a constant C
(depending on A) with f(n) ≤ C · n/(log n)^A for every composite n.
As ranges over integers ?
A conjecture of Erdős, Graham, Ruzsa, and Straus [EGRS75].
By we mean for some integer with .
Let . Does hold for infinitely many ?
It is open even for . Let . Does hold for infinitely many n?
Are there infinitely many pairs of integers such that and have the same set of prime divisors?
Let . Does there exist such that the lower density of is at least and yet for all ?
For every prime p, does the density of integers with h n = p exist?
Does liminf h n = ∞?
Is it true that if p is the greatest prime such that p - 1 ∣ n and p > n ^ ε, then
h n = p?
It is probably true that h n = 3 for infinitely many n.