Wiki
Wiki

Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.

Updated

Problem 210

../

claims/: The 4 claim pages of Problem 210, one per claimant's result; the problem's standing derives from them.


Statement. Let f(n)f(n) be minimal such that the following holds. For any nn points in R2\mathbb{R}^2, not all on a line, there must be at least f(n)f(n) many lines which contain exactly 2 points (called 'ordinary lines'). Does $f(n)\to \infty$? How fast?

Statement (corrected). Let f(n)f(n) be maximal such that the following holds. For any nn points in R2\mathbb{R}^2, not all on a line, there must be at least f(n)f(n) many lines which contain exactly 2 points (called 'ordinary lines'). Does f(n)→∞f(n)\to \infty? How fast?

Notes. The site writes "minimal". Read as the site words it, every ff up to the least number of ordinary lines has the stated property, so the minimal such ff is 00 and the first question fails trivially. The site's commentary means the least number of ordinary lines spanned by nn points in the plane, not all on a line: it calls f(n)≥1f(n)\ge1 the Sylvester-Gallai theorem and credits Motzkin, Kelly and Moser, Csima and Sawyer, and Green and Tao with lower bounds for that quantity. That quantity is the largest ff with the property, so the only change is "minimal" to "maximal". The claim pages are scoped against this Statement.

Status. Proved.

Source. erdosproblems.com/210, accessed 2026-09-04. Cite as: T. F. Bloom, Erdős Problem #210, https://www.erdosproblems.com/210.

References.

  • [CsSa93] Csima, J. and Sawyer, E. T., There exist 6n/136n/13 ordinary points. Discrete Comput. Geom. (1993), 187-202.
  • [GrTa13] Green, Ben and Tao, Terence, On sets defining few ordinary lines. Discrete Comput. Geom. (2013), 409-468.
  • [KeMo58] Kelly, L. M. and Moser, W. O. J., On the number of ordinary lines determined by nn points. Canadian J. Math. (1958), 210-219.
  • [Mo51] Motzkin, Th., The lines and planes connecting the points of a finite set. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. (1951), 451-464.

Formalization. None recorded.

Current assessment

The question has two parts: whether the least number f(n)f(n) of ordinary lines (lines through exactly two of the points) determined by nn points in the plane, not all on one line, tends to infinity, and how fast it grows. The Sylvester-Gallai theorem, conjectured by Sylvester in 1893, rediscovered by Erdős in 1933 and proved by Gallai, gives f(n)≥1f(n)\ge 1; the growth question is due to Erdős and de Bruijn.

Both parts are answered, by four accepted claims. Motzkin (1951) proves f(n)→∞f(n)\to\infty, with a bound of order n\sqrt n. Kelly and Moser (1958) prove f(n)≥3n/7f(n)\ge 3n/7 for every nn, sharp at n=7n=7. Csima and Sawyer (1993) prove f(n)≥6n/13f(n)\ge 6n/13 for n≥8n\ge 8. Green and Tao (2013) determine f(n)f(n) exactly for all large nn (Theorem 2.2 of their paper): f(n)=n/2f(n)=n/2 for even nn, attained by half the points equally spaced on a circle and half at infinity, and f(n)=3⌊n/4⌋f(n)=3\lfloor n/4\rfloor for odd nn, attained by the Böröczky examples. The bound n/2n/2 is the Dirac-Motzkin conjecture. The site says that Motzkin conjectured n/2n/2 for n≥13n\ge 13; Green and Tao note that neither Dirac nor Motzkin seems to have conjectured it formally in print (Dirac twice calls it likely, and Motzkin does not seem to mention it), and the Crowe-McKee configuration of 1313 points with 66 ordinary lines shows that the bound n/2n/2 fails at n=13n=13. An earlier claimed proof of the n/2n/2 bound for large nn, by Hansen, is recorded on the site as flawed. The frontmatter standing derives from the Green-Tao full claim; the three earlier claims are partial. All four results are refereed, and the site's curator credits each of them.

The corpus holds no proof review of these results and does not hold the Motzkin and Csima-Sawyer papers. The exact value of f(n)f(n) for small nn lies outside the question.

Linked library material

These entries are derived from explicit links on library pages. They are navigation only and do not by themselves record mathematical progress.