2006
DOI: 10.12988/ijcms.2006.06065
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Primes in the interval [2n,3n]

Abstract: Is it true that for all integer n > 1 and k ≤ n there exists a prime number in the interval [kn, (k + 1)n]? The case k = 1 is the Bertrand's postulate which was proved for the first time by P. L. Chebyshev in 1850, and simplified later by P. Erdős in 1932, see [2]. The present paper deals with the case k = 2. A positive answer to the problem for any k ≤ n implies a positive answer to the old problem whether there is always a prime in the interval [n 2 , n 2 + n], see [1, p. 11].

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
19
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
2
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The proof of this Theorem is based on the the Bertrand's postulate which states that there exists a prime number in the interval [n, 2n] for all n ∈ Z + . This postulate was proved for the first time by P. L. Chebishev in 1850 and simplified later by P. Erdős in 1932 [3] due to M. El Bachraoui [1].…”
Section: The Products Of Open Intervals In Ordered Group Of Integersmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…The proof of this Theorem is based on the the Bertrand's postulate which states that there exists a prime number in the interval [n, 2n] for all n ∈ Z + . This postulate was proved for the first time by P. L. Chebishev in 1850 and simplified later by P. Erdős in 1932 [3] due to M. El Bachraoui [1].…”
Section: The Products Of Open Intervals In Ordered Group Of Integersmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…For k = 3 the Bertrand's postulate was proved by Bachraoui in 2006, (see [2], Corollary 1.4. ), and for k = 4 it was proved by Loo in 2011, (see [7] ,Theorem 2.4).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…This condition is automatically fulfilled for M ℓ ≥ I + 1, I = A d (N ) due to (4.3). Due to [2,Thm. 1.3] there exists at least one prime number P in the interval [2 I , 3 I ].…”
Section: Tractabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%