files / problems / simon-ionization-excess / compute / q3 / work / smallz.md

2.9 KB · on GitHub

Small-Z residue — q3

Nothing here is a dent. Best published integer bound at Z=2,…,6Z=2,\ldots,6 is still Lieb Nc≤2ZN_c\le 2Z.

Hydrogen uniqueness N0(1)=2N_0(1)=2 is Lieb 1984 and is not claimed.

Replay:

python3 problems/simon-ionization-excess/compute/q3/work/smallz_replay.py
python3 problems/simon-ionization-excess/compute/q3/work/smallz_check.py

Opened this session: Nam 1009.2367v3 HTML, HPS 2504.18487v1 HTML Prop. 2.4–2.5 and (7.10), BGB 2511.07582v1 HTML (only for Z≥12Z\ge 12).

Published envelopes at Z=2,…,6Z=2,\ldots,6

Same arithmetic as q2 envelopes.py, now including Z=6Z=6. Integer exclusion: Nc<UN_c<U means at most the largest integer strictly below UU.

ZZ Lieb Nam HPS s=2s=2 printed / q1 HPS s=3s=3 printed / q1 best integer unsettled
2 5 6.219763 6.143580 / 6.134760 n/a Nc≤4N_c\le 4 2,3,42,3,4
3 7 7.986749 7.890379 / 7.880283 n/a Nc≤6N_c\le 6 3,…,63,\ldots,6
4 9 9.642203 9.527134 / 9.516022 10.801690 / 10.788991 Nc≤8N_c\le 8 4,…,84,\ldots,8
5 11 11.229928 11.097063 / 11.085093 12.388782 / 12.375102 Nc≤10N_c\le 10 5,…,105,\ldots,10
6 13 12.771362 12.621318 / 12.608598 13.917968 / 13.903431 Nc≤12N_c\le 12 6,…,126,\ldots,12

Nam states that 1.22Z+3Z1/3<2Z+11.22Z+3Z^{1/3}<2Z+1 when Z≥6Z\ge 6. HPS states that Prop. 2.4 improves Lieb for Z>5.3Z>5.3. Both hold as real comparisons at Z=6Z=6, and both still have U>12U>12, so they exclude no extra integer. BGB’s formula at Z=6Z=6 is about 14.61>1314.61>13 and is not applicable.

Zhislin gives N0(Z)≥ZN_0(Z)\ge Z.

One finite-ZZ try

HPS Prop. 2.4 maximises the remainder a(x)a(x) on N/Z≤5/2N/Z\le 5/2. At a fixed ZZ, Lieb is N/Z<2+1/ZN/Z<2+1/Z. That a(2+1/Z)a(2+1/Z) is increasing for x>0.81x>0.81, so the max is the right endpoint. The ZZ-local envelope b(2)Z+a(2+1/Z) Z1/3b(2)Z+a(2+1/Z)\,Z^{1/3} is 10.96487810.964878 at Z=5Z=5 and 12.46673112.466731 at Z=6Z=6: below 2Z+12Z+1 as reals, still above 2Z2Z. Same integers as Lieb.

Direct HPS (7.10) and the s=2s=2 form (7.6) at the Lieb edge N=2ZN=2Z, using q1’s λ≈0.628336\lambda\approx 0.628336 for s=2s=2 (printed 0.62840.6284 is weaker): no contradiction. Closest gap is Z=6Z=6, N=12N=12: Nβ2≈9.941<10.269N\beta_2\approx 9.941<10.269.

Nam Lemma 1 / Prop. 1 likewise: published α\alpha lowers sit below the kinetic right-hand side (at Z=6Z=6, N=12N=12 about 6.321<6.7786.321<6.778).

Pair geometry, kinetic dropped. Tetrahedron still blocks N=4N=4 at Z=2Z=2 (54<6454<64). Five vertices of the regular octahedron give

α5,2≤(42+1)/10,α5,2⋅4<3\alpha_{5,2}\le(4\sqrt{2}+1)/10,\qquad \alpha_{5,2}\cdot 4<3

because 128<169128<169: the s=2s=2 pair ratio cannot exclude N=5N=5 at Z=3Z=3.

The full octahedron has 5α6,2>35\alpha_{6,2}>3 (8>25/48>25/4); a prism scan stays above 0.60.6. Not a dent.

Status

Residue. No verifier-plus-certificate beats a published integer envelope at a concrete Z>1Z>1.

Nc(2)≤4,Nc(3)≤6,Nc(4)≤8,Nc(5)≤10,Nc(6)≤12.N_c(2)\le 4,\quad N_c(3)\le 6,\quad N_c(4)\le 8,\quad N_c(5)\le 10,\quad N_c(6)\le 12.