Is this bias on the differences of consecutive even abundant numbers easily explainable?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
2
down vote

favorite












Peter and I were chatting here a little about even abundant numbers and Peter did some serious computer check on the differences of successive even abundant numbers and found that:



In the range $[2, 10^7]$ the difference $2$ occured $ 804622 $ times, difference $4$ occured $758987$ times and difference $6$ occured $892466$ times.



The percentage of occurence of difference $4$ is $dfrac 758987804622+758987+892466 approx 0.309024$



Then he investigated the range $[2,10^8]$ and found that difference $2$ occured $8040361$ times, difference $4$ occured $7585187$ times and difference $6$ occured $ 8929753$ times.



So, percentage of occurence of difference $4$ is $dfrac 75851878040361+7585187+8929753 approx 0.308902$



It could be that situation even more "worsens" in some bigger ranges but even this seems to be some serious bias, is there any simple proof or heuristics of why difference of successive even abundant numbers more frequently has value $2$ 0r $6$ than that of $4$?



I am sensing that this can be easily explained but I do not see a way at this moment.







share|cite|improve this question


























    up vote
    2
    down vote

    favorite












    Peter and I were chatting here a little about even abundant numbers and Peter did some serious computer check on the differences of successive even abundant numbers and found that:



    In the range $[2, 10^7]$ the difference $2$ occured $ 804622 $ times, difference $4$ occured $758987$ times and difference $6$ occured $892466$ times.



    The percentage of occurence of difference $4$ is $dfrac 758987804622+758987+892466 approx 0.309024$



    Then he investigated the range $[2,10^8]$ and found that difference $2$ occured $8040361$ times, difference $4$ occured $7585187$ times and difference $6$ occured $ 8929753$ times.



    So, percentage of occurence of difference $4$ is $dfrac 75851878040361+7585187+8929753 approx 0.308902$



    It could be that situation even more "worsens" in some bigger ranges but even this seems to be some serious bias, is there any simple proof or heuristics of why difference of successive even abundant numbers more frequently has value $2$ 0r $6$ than that of $4$?



    I am sensing that this can be easily explained but I do not see a way at this moment.







    share|cite|improve this question
























      up vote
      2
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      2
      down vote

      favorite











      Peter and I were chatting here a little about even abundant numbers and Peter did some serious computer check on the differences of successive even abundant numbers and found that:



      In the range $[2, 10^7]$ the difference $2$ occured $ 804622 $ times, difference $4$ occured $758987$ times and difference $6$ occured $892466$ times.



      The percentage of occurence of difference $4$ is $dfrac 758987804622+758987+892466 approx 0.309024$



      Then he investigated the range $[2,10^8]$ and found that difference $2$ occured $8040361$ times, difference $4$ occured $7585187$ times and difference $6$ occured $ 8929753$ times.



      So, percentage of occurence of difference $4$ is $dfrac 75851878040361+7585187+8929753 approx 0.308902$



      It could be that situation even more "worsens" in some bigger ranges but even this seems to be some serious bias, is there any simple proof or heuristics of why difference of successive even abundant numbers more frequently has value $2$ 0r $6$ than that of $4$?



      I am sensing that this can be easily explained but I do not see a way at this moment.







      share|cite|improve this question














      Peter and I were chatting here a little about even abundant numbers and Peter did some serious computer check on the differences of successive even abundant numbers and found that:



      In the range $[2, 10^7]$ the difference $2$ occured $ 804622 $ times, difference $4$ occured $758987$ times and difference $6$ occured $892466$ times.



      The percentage of occurence of difference $4$ is $dfrac 758987804622+758987+892466 approx 0.309024$



      Then he investigated the range $[2,10^8]$ and found that difference $2$ occured $8040361$ times, difference $4$ occured $7585187$ times and difference $6$ occured $ 8929753$ times.



      So, percentage of occurence of difference $4$ is $dfrac 75851878040361+7585187+8929753 approx 0.308902$



      It could be that situation even more "worsens" in some bigger ranges but even this seems to be some serious bias, is there any simple proof or heuristics of why difference of successive even abundant numbers more frequently has value $2$ 0r $6$ than that of $4$?



      I am sensing that this can be easily explained but I do not see a way at this moment.









      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Aug 26 at 21:21

























      asked Aug 26 at 21:16









      Right

      1,046213




      1,046213




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          0
          down vote













          Ignoring the cases of odd abundant numbers (which are comparatively very rare), given two successive abundant numbers where the difference between them is $4$, you are guaranteed to have that the either the next or the previous abundant number appears with a difference of $2$ (given that every multiple of six is abundant). Therefore, for every occurence of a difference of $4$, there exists an occurence of difference $2$.



          However, given two successive abundant numbers where the difference between them is $2$, there is no reason to think that the next/previous abundant number appears with difference $4$ - even if that is often the case. This would indicate the the number of occurences of difference $2$ would be higher than the occurences of difference $4$ by some amount. I think this answers one of your questions.



          I can't immediately think why it should be the case that a successive difference of $6$ is more common than both of those. It is known that the natural density of abundant numbers is between $0.2474$ and $0.2480$, but I don't get any further.






          share|cite|improve this answer




















            Your Answer




            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            );
            );
            , "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function()
            var channelOptions =
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "69"
            ;
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
            createEditor();
            );

            else
            createEditor();

            );

            function createEditor()
            StackExchange.prepareEditor(
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: false,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            );



            );













             

            draft saved


            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2895524%2fis-this-bias-on-the-differences-of-consecutive-even-abundant-numbers-easily-expl%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest






























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes








            up vote
            0
            down vote













            Ignoring the cases of odd abundant numbers (which are comparatively very rare), given two successive abundant numbers where the difference between them is $4$, you are guaranteed to have that the either the next or the previous abundant number appears with a difference of $2$ (given that every multiple of six is abundant). Therefore, for every occurence of a difference of $4$, there exists an occurence of difference $2$.



            However, given two successive abundant numbers where the difference between them is $2$, there is no reason to think that the next/previous abundant number appears with difference $4$ - even if that is often the case. This would indicate the the number of occurences of difference $2$ would be higher than the occurences of difference $4$ by some amount. I think this answers one of your questions.



            I can't immediately think why it should be the case that a successive difference of $6$ is more common than both of those. It is known that the natural density of abundant numbers is between $0.2474$ and $0.2480$, but I don't get any further.






            share|cite|improve this answer
























              up vote
              0
              down vote













              Ignoring the cases of odd abundant numbers (which are comparatively very rare), given two successive abundant numbers where the difference between them is $4$, you are guaranteed to have that the either the next or the previous abundant number appears with a difference of $2$ (given that every multiple of six is abundant). Therefore, for every occurence of a difference of $4$, there exists an occurence of difference $2$.



              However, given two successive abundant numbers where the difference between them is $2$, there is no reason to think that the next/previous abundant number appears with difference $4$ - even if that is often the case. This would indicate the the number of occurences of difference $2$ would be higher than the occurences of difference $4$ by some amount. I think this answers one of your questions.



              I can't immediately think why it should be the case that a successive difference of $6$ is more common than both of those. It is known that the natural density of abundant numbers is between $0.2474$ and $0.2480$, but I don't get any further.






              share|cite|improve this answer






















                up vote
                0
                down vote










                up vote
                0
                down vote









                Ignoring the cases of odd abundant numbers (which are comparatively very rare), given two successive abundant numbers where the difference between them is $4$, you are guaranteed to have that the either the next or the previous abundant number appears with a difference of $2$ (given that every multiple of six is abundant). Therefore, for every occurence of a difference of $4$, there exists an occurence of difference $2$.



                However, given two successive abundant numbers where the difference between them is $2$, there is no reason to think that the next/previous abundant number appears with difference $4$ - even if that is often the case. This would indicate the the number of occurences of difference $2$ would be higher than the occurences of difference $4$ by some amount. I think this answers one of your questions.



                I can't immediately think why it should be the case that a successive difference of $6$ is more common than both of those. It is known that the natural density of abundant numbers is between $0.2474$ and $0.2480$, but I don't get any further.






                share|cite|improve this answer












                Ignoring the cases of odd abundant numbers (which are comparatively very rare), given two successive abundant numbers where the difference between them is $4$, you are guaranteed to have that the either the next or the previous abundant number appears with a difference of $2$ (given that every multiple of six is abundant). Therefore, for every occurence of a difference of $4$, there exists an occurence of difference $2$.



                However, given two successive abundant numbers where the difference between them is $2$, there is no reason to think that the next/previous abundant number appears with difference $4$ - even if that is often the case. This would indicate the the number of occurences of difference $2$ would be higher than the occurences of difference $4$ by some amount. I think this answers one of your questions.



                I can't immediately think why it should be the case that a successive difference of $6$ is more common than both of those. It is known that the natural density of abundant numbers is between $0.2474$ and $0.2480$, but I don't get any further.







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered Aug 26 at 21:44









                Matt

                2,234718




                2,234718



























                     

                    draft saved


                    draft discarded















































                     


                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function ()
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2895524%2fis-this-bias-on-the-differences-of-consecutive-even-abundant-numbers-easily-expl%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                    );

                    Post as a guest













































































                    這個網誌中的熱門文章

                    Is there any way to eliminate the singular point to solve this integral by hand or by approximations?

                    Why am i infinitely getting the same tweet with the Twitter Search API?

                    Carbon dioxide