5
$\begingroup$

How to find asymptotically (or some reasonable bound, at least $ o(n) $) number of numbers, representable as a sum of squares of 2 numbers? (in case of bound I am interested in both: lower and upper bounds)

I know how to find explicitly the number of ways to represent given number in such a way. (can be found here)

Thank you!

P.S. For one lower bound you can use this problem, it'll give you somewhat $ \Omega (n^{\frac{3}{4}}) $.

  • 0
    Sure, I meant $ \Omega $. Thank you.2012-12-23

3 Answers 3

9

Let $S_2(x)$ be the number of integers $\leq x$ which are a sum of two squares. Landau, in 1906, showed that $$S_2(x) \sim K \frac{x}{\sqrt{\log x}}$$ where $$K = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \prod_{p \equiv 3 \mod 4} \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-p^{-2}}}$$ I can't find a proof online, but there are references to the statement in many places, such as here.

  • 0
    I have this suspicion it's straightforward if you know a lot about zeta functions, and look at $$ \prod_p \left(1 - \frac{1}{p^s} \right) $$ where $s = 1$ if $p \equiv 0,1 \pmod 4$, otherwise $s = 2$. Alas, I know very little about zeta functions. :(2012-12-23
  • 0
    Yes, it'd be nice if somebody posted whole proof, because it's know quite straightforward. But thank you very much, I would never expect to see asymptotics for this problem, thought, there'll be only some bounds.2012-12-23
  • 0
    @SergeyFinsky, a complete proof is given in LeVeque, now available as an inexpensive combined two-volumes-in-one paperback. Note that $K \approx 0.7642...$ So, Dover publications paperback http://store.doverpublications.com/0486425398.html theorem 7-28 pages 261-263, with error term, in the Volume II section. They have volume I numbered up to page 202, then they start over at 1, so I guess the whole paperback is 500 pages with prefaces and all.2012-12-23
  • 0
    @SergeyFinsky, I see, all of section 7-5 leads up to that, so actually pages 257-263. Furthermore, this builds on the proof of the Prime Number Theorem, and is presented as an illustration of the relevant techniques, so all of Chapter 7, pages 229-263. So, get the book. It's a bargain.2012-12-23
  • 0
    David, posted pages with proof from LeVeque as an answer. Hardly could be said to be self-contained.2012-12-23
5

Posting pages 260-263 from LeVeque. The evident hair on page 262 is not part of the book proper; it evidently fell from my own head onto the scanner, and is one I could ill afford to lose.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

enter image description here

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

enter image description here

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

4

A number can be written as a sum of two squares if and only if it is not divisible an odd number of times by any prime that is $3$ modulo $4$.

In particular, every prime that is $1$ modulo $4$ is a sum of two squares. By the prime number theorem, there are $\Theta(\frac{n}{\log n})$ primes in the interval $[0, n]$. By Dirichlet's theorem on arithmetic progressions, asymptotically half of these are $1$ modulo $4$.

Therefore, the number of numbers less than $n$ that can be written as a sum of two squares is $\Omega(\frac{n}{\log n})$

  • 1
    Dirichlet's theorem does not imply that, you should cite [Prime number theorem for arithmetic progressions](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_number_theorem#Prime_number_theorem_for_arithmetic_progressions) instead2012-12-23
  • 0
    To quote [wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirichlet%27s_theorem_on_arithmetic_progressions): `Stronger forms of Dirichlet's theorem state that ... different arithmetic progressions with the same modulus have approximately the same proportions of primes.` This is the same result you cite under a different name.2012-12-23
  • 0
    Hurkyl, the pages just before the answer i posted, in the LeVeque book, give a heuristic you might like, in about one and a half pages, 257-259.2012-12-23