<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for E. Kowalski's blog</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.ethz.ch/kowalski/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.ethz.ch/kowalski</link>
	<description>Comments on mathematics, mostly.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Jun 2013 02:01:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Bounded gaps between primes: some grittier details by v08ltu</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ethz.ch/kowalski/2013/06/04/bounded-gaps-between-primes-some-grittier-details/#comment-154252</link>
		<dc:creator>v08ltu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Jun 2013 02:01:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ethz.ch/kowalski/?p=3865#comment-154252</guid>
		<description>My understanding is that (up to epsilon) Hypothesis R achieves sqrt(Length) rather than sqrt(Modulus). If this can be applied to both n-variables in (13.7), the bound there would be HN_1 * sqrt(N_2N_3) rather than the N_1d^(5/4) as FI achieve via Deligne. Note HN_1 is just the modulus d itself, so the comparsion when N_i are equal is simply dN vs d^(5/4)N, an easy win. In the attenuated case you have x^(1/2+5/16) and needed to do better than x^(15/16) and this wins.

But if Hooley R can only be applied to one n-variable, the result is HN_1 * N_2*sqrt(N_3), and this is x^(1/2+5/16+5/32) in the border case, not beating x^(15/16).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My understanding is that (up to epsilon) Hypothesis R achieves sqrt(Length) rather than sqrt(Modulus). If this can be applied to both n-variables in (13.7), the bound there would be HN_1 * sqrt(N_2N_3) rather than the N_1d^(5/4) as FI achieve via Deligne. Note HN_1 is just the modulus d itself, so the comparsion when N_i are equal is simply dN vs d^(5/4)N, an easy win. In the attenuated case you have x^(1/2+5/16) and needed to do better than x^(15/16) and this wins.</p>
<p>But if Hooley R can only be applied to one n-variable, the result is HN_1 * N_2*sqrt(N_3), and this is x^(1/2+5/16+5/32) in the border case, not beating x^(15/16).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Bounded gaps between primes! by Bounded gaps between primes and E. Kowalski&#8217;s blog &#124; Pink Iguana</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ethz.ch/kowalski/2013/05/21/bounded-gaps-between-primes/#comment-154243</link>
		<dc:creator>Bounded gaps between primes and E. Kowalski&#8217;s blog &#124; Pink Iguana</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Jun 2013 13:08:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ethz.ch/kowalski/?p=3823#comment-154243</guid>
		<description>[...] work remain clearly superficial, but here are some remarks going a bit beyond what I mentioned in the previous post, coming after these lectures, and some discussions with Ph. Michel and P. Nelson. Share [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] work remain clearly superficial, but here are some remarks going a bit beyond what I mentioned in the previous post, coming after these lectures, and some discussions with Ph. Michel and P. Nelson. Share [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Bounded gaps between primes: some grittier details by bengreen</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ethz.ch/kowalski/2013/06/04/bounded-gaps-between-primes-some-grittier-details/#comment-154235</link>
		<dc:creator>bengreen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Jun 2013 23:17:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ethz.ch/kowalski/?p=3865#comment-154235</guid>
		<description>Emmanuel, this is an excellent post and, from my reading of the paper so far (and also my position of considerably less expertise than you) I think I agree with everything you say. Concerning the factorisation d = qr, it seems that by the Chinese remainder theorem one gets to factor exponentials e_d(.) as e_q(.) e_r(.), and then some incomplete Kloosterman sums mod d become a bit less incomplete mod q (though still incomplete - they are completed by the Fourier expansion of the cutoff n ~ N_3/r, the Fourier coefficients being the kappa(m_i)). Is this splitting of e_d as e_q e_r, the e_r part getting hit by Cauchy-Schwarz, the &quot;dispersion&quot;?  As will be clear, I have only a vague sense of what goes on, though. Another question is how much would simplify if one had the conjectured best estimates on incomplete Kloosterman sums (Hooley&#039;s hypothesis R or something).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Emmanuel, this is an excellent post and, from my reading of the paper so far (and also my position of considerably less expertise than you) I think I agree with everything you say. Concerning the factorisation d = qr, it seems that by the Chinese remainder theorem one gets to factor exponentials e_d(.) as e_q(.) e_r(.), and then some incomplete Kloosterman sums mod d become a bit less incomplete mod q (though still incomplete &#8211; they are completed by the Fourier expansion of the cutoff n ~ N_3/r, the Fourier coefficients being the kappa(m_i)). Is this splitting of e_d as e_q e_r, the e_r part getting hit by Cauchy-Schwarz, the &#8220;dispersion&#8221;?  As will be clear, I have only a vague sense of what goes on, though. Another question is how much would simplify if one had the conjectured best estimates on incomplete Kloosterman sums (Hooley&#8217;s hypothesis R or something).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Bounded gaps between primes: some grittier details by v08ltu</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ethz.ch/kowalski/2013/06/04/bounded-gaps-between-primes-some-grittier-details/#comment-154218</link>
		<dc:creator>v08ltu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jun 2013 20:44:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ethz.ch/kowalski/?p=3865#comment-154218</guid>
		<description>As far as I know, Zhang should take $r$ in Section 14 as large as possible that allows the argument to work (namely, running $n\sim N_3$ modulo $r$ must not be too big, even when multipled by $K^2$).

Instead, he seems to take it as small as possible (13.12) to beat the losses incurred from $H$ introduction and/or $N_1$ exceeding of $x^{3/8}$ and $d_1$ exceeding of $x^{1/2}$ (namely $8\omega+2\omega$, which is $40\omega$ as you win by $\sqrt r$ and apply Cauchy, these $N_1$ and $d_1$ are linked to $H$ selection so you can see it either way).

Unless I am wrong, this is an inefficiency. I think $r$ can be something like $x^{1/12-6\omega}$ or $x^{1/10-8\omega}$ for 14.8 and 14.5, also 14.4 to work.

I think a philosophical reason partially as to why it works is that his Weyl shift was by $hkr$, notably a multiple of $r$ so that the Ramanujan sum pops out of the factorization $e_d()$ down to $e_r()e_s()$. But I agree that is mysterious.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As far as I know, Zhang should take $r$ in Section 14 as large as possible that allows the argument to work (namely, running $n\sim N_3$ modulo $r$ must not be too big, even when multipled by $K^2$).</p>
<p>Instead, he seems to take it as small as possible (13.12) to beat the losses incurred from $H$ introduction and/or $N_1$ exceeding of $x^{3/8}$ and $d_1$ exceeding of $x^{1/2}$ (namely $8\omega+2\omega$, which is $40\omega$ as you win by $\sqrt r$ and apply Cauchy, these $N_1$ and $d_1$ are linked to $H$ selection so you can see it either way).</p>
<p>Unless I am wrong, this is an inefficiency. I think $r$ can be something like $x^{1/12-6\omega}$ or $x^{1/10-8\omega}$ for 14.8 and 14.5, also 14.4 to work.</p>
<p>I think a philosophical reason partially as to why it works is that his Weyl shift was by $hkr$, notably a multiple of $r$ so that the Ramanujan sum pops out of the factorization $e_d()$ down to $e_r()e_s()$. But I agree that is mysterious.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Bounded gaps between primes: some grittier details by Kowalski</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ethz.ch/kowalski/2013/06/04/bounded-gaps-between-primes-some-grittier-details/#comment-154215</link>
		<dc:creator>Kowalski</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jun 2013 17:23:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ethz.ch/kowalski/?p=3865#comment-154215</guid>
		<description>Sorry! It was a Unix permission problem and should be fixed...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry! It was a Unix permission problem and should be fixed&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Bounded gaps between primes: some grittier details by Terence Tao</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ethz.ch/kowalski/2013/06/04/bounded-gaps-between-primes-some-grittier-details/#comment-154214</link>
		<dc:creator>Terence Tao</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jun 2013 17:06:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ethz.ch/kowalski/?p=3865#comment-154214</guid>
		<description>Nice post!  But the final link http://www.math.ethz.ch/~kowalski/fouvry-iwaniec-on-a-theorem.pdf is broken.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice post!  But the final link <a href="http://www.math.ethz.ch/~kowalski/fouvry-iwaniec-on-a-theorem.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.math.ethz.ch/~kowalski/fouvry-iwaniec-on-a-theorem.pdf</a> is broken.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Bounded gaps between primes! by Cornelius Cooper</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ethz.ch/kowalski/2013/05/21/bounded-gaps-between-primes/#comment-154152</link>
		<dc:creator>Cornelius Cooper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Jun 2013 19:40:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ethz.ch/kowalski/?p=3823#comment-154152</guid>
		<description>I a not a mathematician; merely an interested observer, but the proof that an infinite number of primes exits between which there is a gap no greater than 70,000,000; set beside the contention that the number of primes occurs less frequently the further we go in the number line, suggests something about the over all geometry of numbers, with primes behaving as nodes in an infinitely expanding  mesh.  It is almost as if there were a fractal aspect to the phenomenon -- in this instance things getter every larger, rather than ever smaller.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I a not a mathematician; merely an interested observer, but the proof that an infinite number of primes exits between which there is a gap no greater than 70,000,000; set beside the contention that the number of primes occurs less frequently the further we go in the number line, suggests something about the over all geometry of numbers, with primes behaving as nodes in an infinitely expanding  mesh.  It is almost as if there were a fractal aspect to the phenomenon &#8212; in this instance things getter every larger, rather than ever smaller.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Q.E.D, H.E.Q.D.I, H.E.Q.D.P, Q.D.I, Q.F.I, and all that by QED in the OED &#124; God plays dice</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ethz.ch/kowalski/2013/05/29/q-e-d-h-e-q-d-i-h-e-q-d-p-q-d-i-q-f-i-and-all-that/#comment-154108</link>
		<dc:creator>QED in the OED &#124; God plays dice</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 May 2013 16:28:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ethz.ch/kowalski/?p=3867#comment-154108</guid>
		<description>[...] Emanuel Kowalski. Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:Like Loading...   Categories [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Emanuel Kowalski. Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:Like Loading&#8230;   Categories [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Bounded gaps between primes! by The Bounded Gaps Between Primes Theorem has been proved &#124; mathbabe</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ethz.ch/kowalski/2013/05/21/bounded-gaps-between-primes/#comment-153995</link>
		<dc:creator>The Bounded Gaps Between Primes Theorem has been proved &#124; mathbabe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 10:41:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ethz.ch/kowalski/?p=3823#comment-153995</guid>
		<description>[...] Emmanuel Kowalski&#8216;s blog post on the subject if you want to understand the tools Zhang used in his [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Emmanuel Kowalski&#8216;s blog post on the subject if you want to understand the tools Zhang used in his [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Bounded gaps between primes! by Why is mathematics possible? &#124; Combinatorics and more</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ethz.ch/kowalski/2013/05/21/bounded-gaps-between-primes/#comment-153994</link>
		<dc:creator>Why is mathematics possible? &#124; Combinatorics and more</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 10:01:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ethz.ch/kowalski/?p=3823#comment-153994</guid>
		<description>[...] A description of Zhang&#8217;s work and a link to the paper can be found on Emmanuel Kowalski&#8217;s bloog [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] A description of Zhang&#8217;s work and a link to the paper can be found on Emmanuel Kowalski&#8217;s bloog [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
