Approximating the reals by rationals (Littlewood's Conjecture)

  • Thread starter Thread starter funkstar
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Conjecture
funkstar
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

Tim Gowers has a list of possible Polymath projects up, where he mentions the Littlewood Conjecture: This states, informally, that all reals can be approximated reasonably well, in the sense that if we let the denominator of an approximation \frac{u}{v} grow, the error term becomes smaller faster than the denominator becomes larger.

Somehow, I was unaware of this fascinating problem: Cursory examination yields a lot of proof-wise trivial, but still interesting, results. Specifically: If \lim \inf_{n \rightarrow \infty} \{ n ||n\alpha ||\} = 0 for all \alpha then the conjecture if obviously true.

So, it seems obvious that the question of whether \lim \inf_{n \rightarrow \infty} \{ n ||n\alpha ||\} = 0 for all \alpha is also open. But this seems like it should be easier to understand and prove than the Littlewood conjecture itself, because we only have the single real to contend with.

Hence, my question: Does anyone know of any work on approximating a single real with rationals, where the size of the rational is taken into account? Are there any well-known bounds?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
funkstar said:
Hi all,

Tim Gowers has a list of possible Polymath projects up, where he mentions the Littlewood Conjecture: This states, informally, that all reals can be approximated reasonably well, in the sense that if we let the denominator of an approximation \frac{u}{v} grow, the error term becomes smaller faster than the denominator becomes larger.

Somehow, I was unaware of this fascinating problem: Cursory examination yields a lot of proof-wise trivial, but still interesting, results. Specifically: If \lim \inf_{n \rightarrow \infty} \{ n ||n\alpha ||\} = 0 for all \alpha then the conjecture if obviously true.

So, it seems obvious that the question of whether \lim \inf_{n \rightarrow \infty} \{ n ||n\alpha ||\} = 0 for all \alpha is also open. But this seems like it should be easier to understand and prove than the Littlewood conjecture itself, because we only have the single real to contend with.

Hence, my question: Does anyone know of any work on approximating a single real with rationals, where the size of the rational is taken into account? Are there any well-known bounds?
A irrational number is an infinite decimal string but can be approximated more closely than a prior estimate merely by truncating the string after determiining the additional decimal places, i.e. to make the denominator a higher power of 10 than before. Mathematicians have been figuring the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its the radius since B.C. and still a few are not yet satisfied with the number of decimal places calculated by the most modern computers since to calculate pi seems to be used as a bench mark for the power or speed of a computer.
 
lim inf n→∞{n||nα||}=0 is false. The golden ratio is a counterexample
 
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...

Similar threads

Back
Top