mersenneforum.org > Math Prime Density Correction Terms?
 User Name Remember Me? Password
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 2011-07-24, 16:06 #1 wblipp     "William" May 2003 New Haven 23×103 Posts Prime Density Correction Terms? Is there a known correction term to the density primes being 1/ln(x)? There are well known improvements to the nth prime being n*ln(n), but I think these are mostly improved approximations for the Log Integral (Li). What I'm asking about would be an improved integrand for the Log Integral. I know this isn't stated in a mathematically rigorous manner, but I think the question is clear enough.
2011-07-24, 20:23   #2
CRGreathouse

Aug 2006

3×1,993 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by wblipp Is there a known correction term to the density primes being 1/ln(x)?
I'm pretty sure the answer is no. Better estimates would probably be stronger than RH.

2011-07-25, 11:43   #3
R.D. Silverman

Nov 2003

22×5×373 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by CRGreathouse I'm pretty sure the answer is no. Better estimates would probably be stronger than RH.
Indeed. One needs to get a count of the number of primes in a
short interval. Cramer's conjecture asserts the existence of a prime
in the (short) interval x, x + O(log^2 x), but says nothing
about how many there are.

 2011-07-25, 20:42 #4 mart_r     Dec 2008 you know...around... 2C316 Posts I was on that too and came up with 1/ln(x+1/2*ln(x)*sqrt(x)) (ln being the natural logarithm here, as being used in the OP) which was met with about the same criticism as in this thread. Sure, I understand why this is a moot point, but there are some numerical and heuristical indications... Last fiddled with by mart_r on 2011-07-25 at 20:47
2011-07-30, 01:34   #5
LiquidNitrogen

Jun 2011
Henlopen Acres, Delaware

8516 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by wblipp Is there a known correction term to the density primes being 1/ln(x)?
pi(x) = x/[ln(x) - 1.08] was offered as one "improvement", very long time ago.

2011-07-30, 10:54   #6
Arkadiusz

Dec 2009

33 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by LiquidNitrogen pi(x) = x/[ln(x) - 1.08] was offered as one "improvement", very long time ago.
http://oeis.org/A193257

 2011-07-30, 16:37 #7 CRGreathouse     Aug 2006 3·1,993 Posts Arkadiusz, I didn't realize you posted here! (Or lurked, as the case may be.)
2011-09-01, 03:59   #8
CRGreathouse

Aug 2006

3×1,993 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by mart_r I was on that too and came up with 1/ln(x+1/2*ln(x)*sqrt(x)) (ln being the natural logarithm here, as being used in the OP) which was met with about the same criticism as in this thread. Sure, I understand why this is a moot point, but there are some numerical and heuristical indications...
This seems like arguing about whether sin x for large x is more like 0 or 1/x: it seems to miss the point that the osculating portion is large compared to the correction.

As an example, between 10^10 and 10^10 + 10^7 the standard 1/log x predicts 434,285 primes, while this predicts 2 fewer. But there are 434,650, so the actual errors are 365 and 367.

IIRC |pi(x) - li(x)| is known to be >> sqrt(x)/log x infinitely often, while under RH it's << sqrt(x) log x. So it's a priori possible that the correction could be meaningful, but I'm not holding my breath.

 2011-09-02, 22:19 #9 mart_r     Dec 2008 you know...around... 13038 Posts Just this question: Does the Riemann prime counting formula / RH if true imply that $\int (Li(x)-\pi(x)-\frac{\sqrt x}{\log x})$ is - most of the time - closer to zero than $\int (Li(x)-\pi(x))$?
 2011-09-03, 00:09 #10 Zeta-Flux     May 2003 30138 Posts William, I just noticed this question. I'll take a look at my files on this when I get back to work on Tuesday. (If you don't hear from me, remind me.)
2011-09-03, 02:26   #11
CRGreathouse

Aug 2006

175B16 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by mart_r Just this question: Does the Riemann prime counting formula / RH if true imply that $\int (Li(x)-\pi(x)-\frac{\sqrt x}{\log x})$ is - most of the time - closer to zero than $\int (Li(x)-\pi(x))$?
I don't think that's known to be true under the RH.

 Thread Tools

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post Raman Forum Feedback 72 2013-06-22 07:24 CRGreathouse Math 1 2010-08-22 23:47 gd_barnes No Prime Left Behind 25 2009-07-30 12:06 Random Poster Math 1 2008-12-15 01:14 jasong Math 18 2006-03-31 03:14

All times are UTC. The time now is 10:58.

Thu Jan 27 10:58:58 UTC 2022 up 188 days, 5:27, 1 user, load averages: 1.61, 1.42, 1.33

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.

≠ ± ∓ ÷ × · − √ ‰ ⊗ ⊕ ⊖ ⊘ ⊙ ≤ ≥ ≦ ≧ ≨ ≩ ≺ ≻ ≼ ≽ ⊏ ⊐ ⊑ ⊒ ² ³ °
∠ ∟ ° ≅ ~ ‖ ⟂ ⫛
≡ ≜ ≈ ∝ ∞ ≪ ≫ ⌊⌋ ⌈⌉ ∘ ∏ ∐ ∑ ∧ ∨ ∩ ∪ ⨀ ⊕ ⊗ 𝖕 𝖖 𝖗 ⊲ ⊳
∅ ∖ ∁ ↦ ↣ ∩ ∪ ⊆ ⊂ ⊄ ⊊ ⊇ ⊃ ⊅ ⊋ ⊖ ∈ ∉ ∋ ∌ ℕ ℤ ℚ ℝ ℂ ℵ ℶ ℷ ℸ 𝓟
¬ ∨ ∧ ⊕ → ← ⇒ ⇐ ⇔ ∀ ∃ ∄ ∴ ∵ ⊤ ⊥ ⊢ ⊨ ⫤ ⊣ … ⋯ ⋮ ⋰ ⋱
∫ ∬ ∭ ∮ ∯ ∰ ∇ ∆ δ ∂ ℱ ℒ ℓ
𝛢𝛼 𝛣𝛽 𝛤𝛾 𝛥𝛿 𝛦𝜀𝜖 𝛧𝜁 𝛨𝜂 𝛩𝜃𝜗 𝛪𝜄 𝛫𝜅 𝛬𝜆 𝛭𝜇 𝛮𝜈 𝛯𝜉 𝛰𝜊 𝛱𝜋 𝛲𝜌 𝛴𝜎 𝛵𝜏 𝛶𝜐 𝛷𝜙𝜑 𝛸𝜒 𝛹𝜓 𝛺𝜔