Given a positive integer $\displaystyle n = \prod_{i=1}^s p_i^{\alpha_i}$, we write $\Omega(n)$ for the total number $\displaystyle \sum_{i=1}^s \alpha_i$ of prime factors of $n$, counted with multiplicity. Let $\lambda(n) = (-1)^{\Omega(n)}$ (so, for example, $\lambda(12)=\lambda(2^2\cdot3^1)=(-1)^{2+1}=-1$). Prove the following

There are infinitely many positive integers $n$ such that $\lambda(n) = \lambda(n+1)=\lambda(n+2) = +1$

If this problem is following: (I can do it) There are infinitely many positive integers $n$ such that $\lambda(n) = \lambda(n+1) = +1$

it is clear $\lambda(mn)=\lambda(m)\lambda(n)\Longrightarrow \lambda(n^2)=1$, and if the postive integer $n$ such $\lambda(n) = \lambda(n+1) = +1$$(n=9)$,then we have $$\lambda((2n+1)^2-1)=\lambda(4n(n+1))=1=\lambda((2n+1)^2)=1$$

But I can't prove that there exist infinitely many Three Consecutive positive integers $n$ such $\lambda(n)=\lambda(n+1)=\lambda(n+2)=1$.Thanks



There is similar question on MathOverflow that I'm going to reference:

Your question was answered by Hildebrand (On consecutive values of the Liouville function, Enseign. Math. (2) 32 (1986), 219–226) when they proved that all 8 combinations $\pm 1,\pm 1,\pm 1$ occur infinitely often in the Liouville sequence. This is the $k=3$ case of the general problem.

Your question is one of those 8 combinations, namely, just $+1,+1,+1$.

If you want to learn more about the progress on consecutive values of the Liouville function $\lambda(n)$, you can watch Terence Tao's lecture at the Building Bridges II. conference from 2018. (Here is the direct video link.) $-$ The mentioned reference (Hildebrand, 1986.) for the solution of your problem is given at 18:20 mark of the linked video.

The Proof of $(+1,+1,+1)$

I have tracked down the result (Hildebrand, 1986.) which you should be able to read here: (On consecutive values of the Liouville function, Enseign. Math. (2) 32 (1986), 219–226).

I will copy the proof for the $\lambda(n)=\lambda(n+1)=\lambda(n+2)=1$ case, exactly as it is given in the linked paper, down below. (Via the magic of OCR.)

We first need to prove the following lemma.

LEMMA. Each of the equations $$ \lambda(15 n-1)=\lambda(15 n+1)=1 $$ and $$ \lambda(15 n-1)=\lambda(15 n+1)=-1 $$ holds for infinitely many positive integers $n$.

Proof. Given a positive integer $n_{0} \geqslant 2,$ define $n_{i}, i \geqslant 1,$ inductively by $$ n_{i+1}=n_{i}\left(4 n_{i}^{2}-3\right) \quad(i \geqslant 0) $$ It is easily checked that $$ n_{i+1} \pm 1=\left(n_{i} \pm 1\right)\left(2 n_{i}+1\right)^{2} \quad(i \geqslant 0) $$ so that $$ \lambda\left(n_{i+1} \pm 1\right)=\lambda\left(n_{i} \pm 1\right)-\ldots-\lambda\left(n_{0} \pm 1\right) \quad(i \geqslant 0) $$ Also, it follows by induction that $n_{0} | n_{i}$ for all $i \geqslant 0 .$

Therefore, taking in turn $n_{0}=15$ and $n_{0}=30$ and noting that $$ \lambda(14)=\lambda(16)=1, \quad \lambda(29)=\lambda(31)=-1 $$ we obtain two infinite sequences $\left(n_{i}^{(+)}\right)$ and $\left(n_{i}^{(-)}\right)$ with the required properties $$ n_{i}^{(\pm)} \equiv 0(\bmod 15), \quad \lambda\left(n_{i}^{(+)} \pm 1\right)=1, \quad \lambda\left(n_{i}^{(-)} \pm 1\right)=-1 $$ $$ \square $$

Now we are ready to prove the claim.

We shall show here that (2) $$ \lambda(n)=\lambda(n+1)=\lambda(n-1)=1 $$

has infinitely many solutions.

Call an integer $n \geqslant 2$ "good", if (2) holds for this $n$. We have to show that there are infinitely many good integers. To this end we shall show that for any positive integer $n$ satisfying (3) $$ n \equiv 0(\bmod 15), \quad \lambda(n+1)=\lambda(n-1)=1 $$ the interval (4) $$ I_{n}=\left[\frac{4 n}{5}, 4 n+5\right] $$ contains a good integer. Since by the LEMMA, (3) holds for infinitely many positive integers $n$, the desired result follows.

To prove our assertion we fix a positive integer $n$, for which (3) holds. We may suppose $\lambda(n)=-1,$ since otherwise $n \in I_{n}$ is good, and we are done. Put $N=4 n,$ and note that, by construction, $N$ is divisible by $3$, $4$ and $5$.

From (3) we get, using the multiplicativity of the function $\lambda$, $$ \lambda(N \pm 4)=\lambda(4(n \pm 1))=\lambda(4) \lambda(n \pm 1)=1 $$ and our assumption $\lambda(n)=-1$ implies $$ \lambda(N)=\lambda(4 n)=\lambda(4) \lambda(n)=-1 $$ If now $$ \lambda(N+5)=\lambda(N-5)=-1 $$ then $$ \lambda\left(\frac{N}{5} \pm 1\right)=\frac{\lambda(N \pm 5)}{\lambda(5)}=1=-\lambda(N)=\lambda\left(\frac{N}{5}\right) $$ and $N / 5=4 n / 5 \in I_{n}$ is good.

We may therefore suppose that at least one of values $\lambda(N+5)$ and $\lambda(\mathrm{N}-5)$ equals $1$.

For definiteness we shall assume $\lambda(N+5)=1 ;$ the other case is treated in exactly the same way.

If $\lambda(N+3)=1$ or $\lambda(N+6)=1,$ then $N+4 \in I_{n}$ or $N+5 \in I_{n}$ is good.

But in the remaining case $$ \lambda(N+3)=\lambda(N+6)=-1 $$ we have $$ \lambda\left(\frac{N}{3}\right)=\lambda\left(\frac{N}{3}+1\right)=\lambda\left(\frac{N}{3}+2\right)=1 $$ so that $(N+3) / 3 \in I_{n}$ is good.

Thus (3) implies the existence of a good integer in the interval as we had to show. $$ \blacksquare $$


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.