Convergence of a sum over primes

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the convergence of the sum of a nonincreasing sequence of positive numbers indexed by primes, specifically the condition that \(\sum_{p}a_p\) converges if and only if \(\sum_{n=2}^{\infty}\frac{a_n}{\log(n)}\) converges. The approach involves extending the sequence \(a_n\) to positive reals and utilizing the integral test to relate the two sums. The Prime Number Theorem is employed to derive the behavior of \(\pi(t)\) and its derivative, leading to the conclusion that the convergence of the integral is equivalent to the convergence of the series. However, the discussion highlights challenges in rigorously proving the order of the derivative of \(\pi(x)\) and its implications for the proof.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of nonincreasing sequences and convergence criteria
  • Familiarity with the Prime Number Theorem and prime counting function \(\pi(x)\)
  • Knowledge of integral tests for convergence of series
  • Basic concepts of interpolation and derivatives in mathematical analysis
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of the Prime Number Theorem and its implications for prime distributions
  • Learn about the integral test for convergence in series and its applications
  • Explore the concept of linear interpolation and its mathematical rigor
  • Investigate the twin prime conjecture and its impact on prime gaps and slopes
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, number theorists, and students interested in prime number theory and convergence of series, particularly those exploring advanced topics in analysis and number theory.

Boorglar
Messages
210
Reaction score
10
I am trying to understand a condition for a nonincreasing sequence to converge when summed over its prime indices. The claim is that, given a_n a nonincreasing sequence of positive numbers,
then \sum_{p}a_p converges if and only if \sum_{n=2}^{\infty}\frac{a_n}{\log(n)} converges.

I have tried various methods to prove this but my error estimates are always too large.
The closest I came to a proof is this: first, extend the sequence a_n = a(n) to positive reals by "connecting the dots" (interpolating by some nondecreasing function that takes on the same values as a_n on the integers. Then, do the same for \pi(x) (prime counting function) and p(x) (the n-th prime). The goal is to use the integral test to relate the two sums.

So \sum_{p}a_p converges if and only if \int_{1}^{\infty}a(p(x))dx converges.
Using the substitution t = p(x) (so x = \pi(t), dx = \pi'(t)dt), the second integral equals \int_{2}^{\infty}a(t)\pi'(t)dt. By the Prime Number Theorem, \pi(t) = \frac{t}{\log(t)} + O\left(\frac{t}{\log^2(t)}\right), so the derivative is (intuitively) \pi'(t) = \frac{1}{\log(t)} + O\left(\frac{1}{\log^2(t)}\right). So, assuming this "intuition" is correct, the integral is \int_{2}^{\infty}\frac{a(t)}{\log(t)}dt + ... where the ellipsis are terms of lower order than the main term. This integral converges if and only if \sum_{n=2}^{\infty}\frac{a_n}{\log(n)} converges.

That would be good, but I am unable to prove the "intuitive" step. I need some estimate on the order of the derivative of \pi(x), but the only information I have is the big-Oh of the function, not its derivative.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
can pi(x) be defined for non integer x as the linear interpolation between neighboring integer values? then the derivative has some meaning and the proof looks pretty convincing
 
Well, that's what I want to do. My problem is how to rigorously prove that the slopes of the linear interpolation grow with order 1/log(x). The main issue is that pi(x) will be constant most of the time, except at the primes where it jumps by 1, so there will be infinitely many points where the slope will be 1, so it can't be O(1/log(x)).
 
pi(x) , meaning the linearly interpolated version, has a slope of 1/distance between neighboring primes, doesn't it?
 
Oh oops. Yeah it would be 1 / (p(n+1) - p(n)). But still, assuming the twin prime conjecture is true, there would be infinitely many cases where the slope is 1/2... Clearly this happens rarely, but does it compensate for the desired O(1/log x) order?
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K