Source. van Doorn and GPT-6 Astra Pro, "Practical numbers and Egyptian
fractions," Proposition 4.1 (p. 5), proved on pp. 5–6 from Lemma 3.3 and
Corollary 3.4; the statement was read on the page image, the proof for
structure only. The uniform form is what Theorems 1.2 and 1.3 use; the Lean
file proves it as the lemma uniform_rep that the three main theorems
invoke (not built here).
Statement
Let c0=14/log2. One can fix an integer E≥4 and a real x0>ee with
this property: whatever the real x≥x0 and the odd prime p∗, some
practical number n satisfies
x≤n<x2,2E∥n,p∗∤n,
and (display (4.1))
h(n)≤c0(loglogx)2−1<c0(loglogn)2.
Proof sketch
Put Q(k)=k6logk and take k0 large. Given p∗, the construction
starts from n0=2EV0, where V0 is a squarefree product of k0 primes
from (Q(k0),2Q(k0)], none equal to p∗, and E≥4 is fixed with
2E>2Q(k0); building n0 up from 2E one prime p at a time, with
binary expansions of 0,…,p−1 as the representatives in Lemma 3.1
(A=p, L=E), shows that n0 is practical with h(n0)≤(k0+1)E. Each
later step multiplies by a fresh modulus: with kj=ω(Vj) and
nj=2EVj, Lemma 3.3 supplies Aj, odd, squarefree, prime to p∗Vj
and made of t(kj) primes from (Q(kj),2Q(kj)], where
t(k)=⌊14k/(c0(7logk+3loglogk))⌋, and the next terms are
Vj+1=VjAj, nj+1=Ajnj and kj+1=kj+t(kj). Corollary 3.4 gives
h(nj)≤4j+O(1) (display (4.2)). With uj=logkj the recurrence is
uj+1−uj=14/(c0(7uj+3loguj))+O(uj−2), so for
F(u)=(c0/4)u2+(3c0/14)(ulogu−u) Taylor's formula gives
F(uj+1)−F(uj)=1+O(uj−1), whence j=F(uj)+O(uj) and (display
(4.3))
h(nj)≤c0uj2+76c0ujloguj+O(uj).
Since kj!≤Vj≤(2Q(kj))kj, loglognj=uj+loguj+O(1)
(display (4.4)), and logAj<lognj gives nj+1<nj2 for large
k0. Given x above the uniform bound on n0, the earliest nj that is at
least x has nj−1<x, so x≤nj<nj−12<x2; take n=nj.
Substituting uj=loglogx−logloglogx+O(1) into (4.3) gives
h(n)≤c0(loglogx)2−(8c0/7)(loglogx)(logloglogx)+O(loglogx),
which is below c0(loglogx)2−1 for large x. Since p∗ plays no
role in choosing (kj), no constant here depends on p∗.
Reconstruction
An author-recorded reconstruction of the claimed proof, labeled claimed and
not an independent review, is filed as
the Proposition 4.1 reconstruction.
Dependencies
Lemma 3.1 (extension of a practical number), Lemma 3.2 (character-sum
criterion for the representation c≡z0+2z1+4z2+8z3(modA) with
zi∣V), Lemma 3.3 (existence of the modulus, using the prime number
theorem in (Q,2Q], a divisibility count and Hölder's inequality) and
Corollary 3.4 of the note.
Standing
Claimed; proof not checked here; the author-side Lean proof was not built.
Bears on
- Problem 18: the uniform form of the claimed
answer to the first question.
- Problem 304 and
Problem 293: the input to Theorems 1.2
and 1.3 (the conditions 2E∥n and p∗∤n let b∤n be
arranged).