5
$\begingroup$

If the conjecture "Every even number is the difference of two primes" holds then we conclude the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis. For every distinct non-zero integers $a, b$, at least one of the numbers $a, b$ and $a-b$ can be expressed as the difference of two primes.

Question. Is the converse true (does the hypothesis imply the conjecture)?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ hint : every even number can be written as $a-b$ where $a+2,b+2$ are odd and not prime. $\endgroup$ – reuns Sep 7 '16 at 20:25
5
$\begingroup$

Yes. Take any even $n$; if it were the case that for all odd $b$, at least one of $b+2$ and $b+n+2$ were prime, the primes would have nonzero density.° So take a $b$ for which it is not the case, and the hypothesis implies $n$ is a difference of two primes.

° Partition the odd numbers in pairs with difference $n$: $\{1,n+1\}\{3,n+3\},\ldots,\{n-1,2n-1\};\; \{2n+1,3n+1\},\ldots,\{3n-1,4n-1\};\;\ldots$. There are $kn/2$ pairs below $2kn$ ($k\in\mathbb N$), so there are at least $(x-2n)/4$ pairs below $x$. Each pair has at least one prime, so $\pi(x)\geq x/8-n/4$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I am not sure I get it. Let $\mathcal{P}$ be the set of primes and $2m$ some even integer. If $\mathcal{P}$ does not intersect $\mathcal{P}+2m$, where is the contradiction? $\endgroup$ – Jack D'Aurizio Sep 7 '16 at 20:31
  • $\begingroup$ @JackD'Aurizio I get a contradication from assuming that $p$ or $p+n$ is prime for every odd $p$. There must be a $p$ for which this is not true, and choosing $a=p+n-2$, $b=p-2$ (which are not differences of primes by the choice of $p$) we get that $n\in\mathcal P-\mathcal P$. $\endgroup$ – rabota Sep 7 '16 at 20:39
  • $\begingroup$ @JackD'Aurizio see my comment, it is clear, and barto used the 0 density of $\mathcal{P}$ for proving my hint $\endgroup$ – reuns Sep 7 '16 at 20:39
  • $\begingroup$ Apologies, I thought that was intended as a proof of the fact than $2\mathbb{N}\subset (\mathcal{P}-\mathcal{P})$. $\endgroup$ – Jack D'Aurizio Sep 7 '16 at 20:41
  • $\begingroup$ @barto. Thanks for your answer. Would you please give more explanation that why it contradicts the zero density of primes? $\endgroup$ – M.H.Hooshmand Sep 8 '16 at 5:02

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.