Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Source. Printed p. 103, physical PDF p. 2, the paragraph beginning "I further proved", read on the page image; the bibliography on printed p. 109 (physical PDF p. 8) for the references.
Statement, verbatim
"I further proved that if is the sequence of primes then is irrational for every [4]. I could not prove that is irrational for every . This is probably very difficult already for . It seems reasonable to expect that if , then
is irrational, but I can prove the irrationality of (2) only under much more restrictive conditions; shows that some growth condition is needed for the irrationality of (2)."
Reference [4] is "P. Erdős, Sur certaines series a valeur irrationnelle, Enseignement Math. 4 (1958), 93--100", filed as erdos_1958_sur_certaines_series_valeur_irrationnelle_french.
Notes
- The first sentence overstates the 1958 paper. That paper proves irrational and asserts the cases without proof (its main theorem). The first published proof for is Schlage-Puchta 2007, Theorem 3. Nothing here attributes the cases to Erdős.
- The second and third sentences are problem 251 for ; the site's page states the expectation for every as a remark citing this page.
- The expectation about (2) assumes only and , with no monotonicity. The paper does not say which "much more restrictive conditions" it means. Two theorems that prove (2) irrational under such conditions are in papers it cites: the 1958 section 3 theorem (its [4]: nondecreasing with the growth hypothesis (5), the sum rational only when eventually) and Erdős–Straus 1974, Theorem 3.1 (its [3]: monotone with and ). The 2026 Kovač note claims an explicit sequence with , not monotone, whose sum (2) is exactly ; it is a claimed counterexample to the expectation as stated here, non-refereed, with no independent review filed in this library. The monotone theorems (Erdős 1958 section 3; Hančl–Tijdeman 2004, Theorem 5.1 and Theorem 6.1) are not affected.
- The example gives sum by telescoping (); it is the case of the rational family in the 1958 theorem.
Bears on. #251.