Is this Riemann sum formula for definite integral using of prime numbers true?
Is this Riemann sum formula for definite integral using of prime numbers true?
While answering another question in MSE, I had used the following result which I thought was a trivial consequence of the prime number theorem and equidistribution. However, I realized from the comments that many people thought that this was not either true or counter intuitive. Hence I am posting this as a question looking for a proof or disproof.
Let $p_k$ be the $k$-th prime and $f$ be a continuous function
Riemann integrable in $(0,1)$ such that
$$lim_n to inftyfrac1nsum_r = 1^nfBig(fracrnBig)
= int_0^1f(x)dx. $$
Then, $$ lim_n to inftyfrac1nsum_r =
1^nfBig(fracp_rp_nBig) = int_0^1f(x)dx. $$
My proof was based on showing that as $n to infty$, the ratios $p_r/p_n$ approached equidistribution in $(0,1)$ hence the integral follows as a trivial property of equidistributed sequence.
Motivation: There are several identities, limits etc on prime numbers which can be easily proven using this simple formula, including all answers to all three questions on the arithmetic, geometric and harmonic means of primes mentioned in the above link.
$begingroup$
@JeppeStigNielsen How do you know that the first interval will have more primes asymptotically?
$endgroup$
– Yanko
Sep 18 '18 at 15:03
$begingroup$
@JeppeStigNielsen I think the same as you. For me, it would look nicer, if one changes $dx$ by another integrator (kinda Riemann-Stieltjes) related to the distribution of primes.
$endgroup$
– DCao
Sep 18 '18 at 15:10
$begingroup$
@JeppeStigNielsen use the prime number theorem: $pi(n)/pi(2n)approx (n/log (n))/(2nlog(2n)) = 1/2 (log(2)+log(n))/log(n)to 1/2$
$endgroup$
– Bananach
Sep 18 '18 at 15:13
$begingroup$
@Marcuswood the prime number theorem says that F(x)=x indeed. This is essentially because the "average gap" $log x$ between prime numbers is a slowly varying function, too slow to matter when the numbers of prime numbers at $n$ and $x n$ are considered with $ntoinfty$.
$endgroup$
– Bananach
Sep 18 '18 at 15:24
2 Answers
2
Too long for a comment
Divide $[0,1]$ into $$[0,p_1/p_n],[p_1/p_n,p_2/p_n],cdots,[p_n-1/p_n,1]$$
Then, using Riemann sum, we have
$$I:=int^1_0f(x)dx=lim_ntoinftysum^n_k=1fleft(fracp_kp_nright)fracp_k+1-p_kp_n$$
If we assume that $p_j=jln j$,
$$I=lim_ntoinftysum^n_k=1fleft(fracp_kp_nright)h(k,n)+lim_ntoinftyfrac1n sum^n_k=1fleft(fracp_kp_nright) qquad(1)$$
where
$$h(k,n)=frac(k+1)ln(k+1)-kln knln n-frac1n$$
It can be shown that $$h(k,n)le h(n,n)=O(frac1nln n)$$
Therefore, the absolute value of the first term in $(1)$ is upper bounded by
$$h(n,n)cdot nMto 0$$ where $M$ is a positive constant. This leads us to our desired result.
I am not sure if this argument can be made rigorous. I will review it when I have leisure time.
$begingroup$
This is already an answer in with an approach different from mine. Waiting for your leisure time lol
$endgroup$
– Nilotpal Kanti Sinha
Sep 20 '18 at 3:48
Posting this as an answer rather than a comment because it contains the actual answer. Since I did not get a conclusive answer in MSE, I posted the question in MO where a rigorous proof was provided.
https://mathoverflow.net/questions/311085/calculating-limits-using-integration-for-sequence-of-prime-numbers
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
But avoid …
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy
$begingroup$
If you take the example $f(x)=2x$, then the right-hand side is just one. However, for a huge (fixed) value of $n$, there would be more primes in the interval $[0,p_n/2]$ than in the interval $[p_n/2,p_n]$, so why whould the value of that average be near the number one? ADDITION: As an example, among the first half billion numbers there are 26355867 primes, but among the next half billion numbers, i.e. between $0.5cdot 10^9$ and $10^9$, there are only 24491667 primes.
$endgroup$
– Jeppe Stig Nielsen
Sep 18 '18 at 15:00