The Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: Early (1930's) work on arithmetic progressions
Replies: 10   Last Post: Oct 1, 2017 11:40 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
David Bernier

Posts: 3,892
Registered: 12/13/04
Re: Early (1930's) work on arithmetic progressions
Posted: Sep 28, 2017 12:11 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On 09/28/2017 08:25 AM, Jack Campin wrote:
>>>> I'm trying to understand some of the early work on arithmetic
>>>> progressions. In the above paper, I don't understand how van der
>>>> Waerden's theorem is used to prove (8) on page 236. It's true that
>>>> one of the sets in the partition will contain arithmetic
>>>> progressions of length k. But, in the partition of the integers
>>>> from 1 to r_k * n_0, an A_i will have lots of members which are
>>>> not in the a_i maximal sequence. So I don't see how an A_i with an
>>>> arithmetical progression of length k establishes a contradiction.

>> should be openable by all. PDF, not being particularily friendly, is
>> a deterent to considering your question.

> Nothing wrong with it. Opens just fine in either Apple Preview (which
> ignores the certification stuff) or Adobe Reader (which on my system
> can be asked to ignore it).
> I've no idea about the argument, though.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> e m a i l : j a c k @ c a m p i n . m e . u k
> Jack Campin, 11 Third Street, Newtongrange, Midlothian EH22 4PU, Scotland
> mobile 07895 860 060 <> Twitter: JackCampin

Some might be interested in later developments on sequences of integers
in [1, n] that avoid arithmetic progressions of length
k = 3 ( other cases are k =4, k = 5 and so on).

Endre Szemerédi has a presentation in the 1974 Proceedings
of the International Congress of Mathematicians.

It refers to a paper of Behrend from 1938, and another from

David Bernier

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2018. All Rights Reserved.