Plectis

Long paper

Reciprocal Mersenne Subseries

Summary. A weighted summability criterion proves irrationality of reciprocal Mersenne subseries: if h is the part of a supported on a finite nonempty prime set P, every infinite A with ∑ h(a)/(a(bh(a)−1)) finite has irrational ∑ (ba−1)−1. The base-two condition gives the conclusion at every integer base for every infinite subset, and permits an example with divergent reciprocal sum, while excluding full support and all odd exponents. The proof averages over a finite part of the support and over dyadic observation lengths. Erdős's weaker reciprocal-summable theorem is proved in full, and a common window extends both arguments to unions of weighted and positive-cover supports. Finite-denominator and achievement-set calculations formulate tests for the targets 1/2 and 1/21; those tests do not decide either target or the universal question. Prime support at base 2 and squarefree support at power-of-two bases are attributed as existing work.

This paper covers a claim-bounded problem-specific reasoning surface for Erdős #257: selected checked premises, finite computations, closed routes, surviving obligations, and their exact evidence bands.

It does not establish the validity of claims tagged Lean, which belongs to the cited kernel-checked source, or a solution to Erdős #257, whose universal and half-value questions remain open.

In this paper
Prime support and the limits of one formal argument

The base-2 statement

Irrational(∑p prime12p−1)

is known. Expanding geometrically and collecting divisors gives

∑p prime12p−1=∑n≥1ω(n)2n,

and Tao–Teräväinen prove the latter series irrational in Theorem 1.3 of Quantitative correlations and some problems on prime factors of consecutive integers. This is a cited analytic result, not a theorem formalised in Lean.

The existing pairwise-coprime Lean theorem does not recover it because that theorem assumes ∑a∈A1/a<∞, whereas ∑p1/p diverges. The block-certificate criterion behind it would also demand, in the prime case,

2r∣ω(N+r)(1≤r≤K),

a simultaneous exact divisibility pattern far stronger than the input used by Tao–Teräväinen. Small computational witnesses for K=2,3 diagnose that the condition is not vacuous, but they neither prove the known theorem nor define a new open case.

Thus the contribution of this analysis is negative and specific to the method: it identifies why the present formal certificate criterion fails to reproduce a theorem already available by quantitative correlation estimates. The earlier proposal to prove the prime-support irrationality as new mathematics is withdrawn. Extensions to other bases or prime-power supports are mentioned by the cited authors with proof modifications omitted; this paper promotes only the fully written base-2 theorem.

About this paper

Authorship and AI use. Will Cook built and directed the research infrastructure and maintains the public release. He reviewed claims when he could. AI agents did most of the research and drafting. Cook did not independently verify every claim.

Cite and contact. Cite this paper by its title, author and date above, with its PDF; cite the earlier sources it uses for a mathematical result. For software, use the release citation and give the commit used. Contact Will with questions or corrections.

Prefer the manuscript?

Equations typeset from the exact TeX. Rendered from the LaTeX manuscript source with file fingerprint sha256:47cf6a152738f17c. Its file fingerprint matched the published source record, so the PDF above, the LaTeX, and this page are one manuscript. Redeploying the site regenerates this page from whatever the public repository holds at that moment.