4 ms·
The questions are answered in the article. The equivalence is not supposed to be obvious even to other number theorists. Most of the article is devoted to expla
by hyperbovine 15y ago
The questions are answered in the article. The equivalence is not supposed to be obvious even to other number theorists. Most of the article is devoted to explaining "why" it works since the actual proof is two paragraphs.
- JoeAltmaier 15y agoDon't know what you're talking about. The article is about unproved theorems. They are described as being simple or obvious, but there's nothing obvious about Prove that for n > 1, divsum(n) < H_n + exp(H_n)log(H_n) why exp log? That's the question.
- archgoon 15y agoI believe that hyperbovine was referring to the article linked by tzs that explains the relation. http://arxiv.org/pdf/math/0008177v2 http://arxiv.org/pdf/math/0008177v2