Number Theory - Show harmonic numbers are not integers

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on proving that the harmonic numbers, defined as the sum 1 + 1/2 + 1/3 + ... + 1/n for n > 0, are not integers. Various methods are suggested, including using p-adic valuations to show that the 2-adic valuation exceeds 1 for n > 1, and manipulating terms when n is a prime number. Another approach involves demonstrating that the sum can be expressed as a fraction of an even and odd number, which cannot yield an integer. The conversation also touches on the existence of prime numbers between m and 2m, referencing a theorem attributed to Erdős. Overall, the thread emphasizes the complexity of proving the non-integral nature of harmonic numbers.
viren_t2005
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
Q.Prove that 1+1/2+1/3+1/4+...+1/n is not an integer.n>0
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There are a couple ways to prove this that I know of. Your title says number theory so if you have discussed in class (or read on your own) p-adic valuations, try to show that for a fixed n>1 the 2-adic valuation is always greater than 1. If you don't have experience with this, try the sum where n=p (some prime). Make an argument (manipulate terms) why this isnt' an integer. Then fix that p, and pick an x between p and 2p-1, and follow a similar argument. Unfortunately you now must prove that for any x such a p exists. I believe this was proven by Erdos. Maybe your teacher will let you get away with that as justification. Another way is to show that for some n, the sum=(even number + odd number)/2N *odd number which isn't an integer.
 
I think you mean n > 1. If it's just n > 0, then the sum for n = 1 should not be an integer, but that sum is just 1, which clearly is an integer.
 
Is there a theorem that you know that says that (for large enough m), there is always a prime number between m and 2m?

Carl
 
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
873
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
863
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K