17
$\begingroup$

The arithmetic mean of prime gaps around $x$ is $\ln(x)$. What is the geometric mean of prime gaps around $x$ ?

Does that strongly depend on the conjectures about the smallest and largest gap such as Cramer's conjecture or the twin prime conjecture ?

$\endgroup$
10
  • $\begingroup$ Why the geometric average? $\endgroup$
    – draks ...
    May 6, 2015 at 10:51
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Why not ? A very often used average. It would give some insight. $\endgroup$
    – mick
    May 7, 2015 at 6:13
  • $\begingroup$ ...the arithmetic one is always the first that comes to my mind, so I just wondered why you expect more insight from "geometrical" point of view... $\endgroup$
    – draks ...
    May 7, 2015 at 9:01
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ @draks: Looking at things from two sides gives more insight than just one viewpoint. $\endgroup$
    – MvG
    May 7, 2015 at 9:47
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Of course we have by the AM-GM inequality that the geometric mean is smaller. $\endgroup$
    – wythagoras
    May 10, 2015 at 18:48

2 Answers 2

9
+50
$\begingroup$

In 1976 Gallagher proved, under the assumption of a uniform version of the Hardy-Littlewood $k$-tuples conjecture, that for any fixed $\lambda>0$ and integer $k$ $$\#\{\text{ integers } x\leq X\ :\ \pi(x+\lambda \log x)-\pi(x)=k\}\sim e^{-\lambda}\frac{\lambda^k}{k!}X,$$ that is it follows a Poisson distribution.

Since the waiting times for a Poisson distribution is an exponential distribution, Gallagher's work also yields (on the assumption of a uniform Hardy-Littlewood conjecture) that for fixed $\alpha,\beta$ $$\frac{1}{\pi(x)}\#\{n\leq \pi(x):\ g_n\in \left(\alpha \log x, \beta \log x\right)\}\sim \int_\alpha^\beta e^{-t}.$$ Thus the geometric mean of the $g_n$ asymptotically will equal $$\exp\left(\frac{1}{\pi(x)}\sum_{n\leq \pi(x)} \log (g_n)\right)\sim \exp\left(\log \log x+\int_0^\infty \log t e^{-t}dt\right).$$ Since $\int_0^\infty \log t e^{-t}dt=-\gamma$ where $\gamma$ is the Euler-Mascheroni constant, and we find that the geometric mean is

$$\sim e^{-\gamma}\log x.$$

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Would like to see the actual proof (free). $\endgroup$
    – mick
    Jun 1, 2015 at 0:35
8
$\begingroup$

I thought Hardy-Littlewood might come into it. Here is some numerical data following Erics great answer: x-axis: N ; y-axis: Geometric mean of the first 10000 prime gaps following $10^N$ divided by $\ln 10^N$

x-axis: N

y-axis: Geometric mean of the first 10000 prime gaps following $10^N$ divided by $\ln 10^N$.

$e^{-\gamma} \approx 0.56146$.

$\endgroup$
2
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This is fantastic. I was wondering why my numerical data seemed a little off - I did not take $N$ to be anywhere near large enough! $\endgroup$ May 17, 2015 at 11:03
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It does converge rather slow(ly?). The number of gaps for a given size has to be large as well. Looking at the graph, 10000 gaps is not enough to get a very accurate result, but the trend is clearly visible. $\endgroup$ May 18, 2015 at 12:14

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.