Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Source. Hughes, arXiv:2609.10902v1, Remark 6 (pp. 4–5); read on the page
image.
Statement
h(n!)≫(logn)2 as n→∞.
Proof sketch
Let T=τ(n!) and k=h(n!). If k≤T/2, every 1≤m≤n! is a
subset sum of at most k of the T divisors, so
n!≤∑i≤k(iT)≤(eT/k)k. By Chebyshev's bound
π(x)≪x/logx, logT=∑p≤nlog(vp(n!)+1)≪n/logn
(primes p≤n contribute O(nlogn); primes p>n in
(n/2r+1,n/2r] have vp(n!)=⌊n/p⌋<2r+1 and number
O(n/(2rlogn))).
Since logn!≍nlogn, the counting bound gives
nlogn≪klog(eT/k)≤k(1+logT)≪kn/logn, so k≫(logn)2.
If instead k>T/2, then k>n/2, because each of 1,…,n divides n!
and so T≥n; this again gives k≫(logn)2.
The remark ends (p. 5) by noting that the lower bound (logn)2 and the
upper bound n/logn are still far apart, and recalls Erdős's questions
whether h(n!)<no(1) and whether even h(n!)<(logn)O(1)
([ErGr80], pp. 37–38).
Reconstruction
An author-recorded reconstruction of the argument, not an independent
review, is filed as
the Remark 6 reconstruction.
Bears on
Problem 18: the third question cannot be
answered with an exponent below 2; the second and third questions are
restated.