Erdős-Herzog-Piranian Distance Products: Improved Lower Bound
Nothing has been published against this problem here, and nobody has checked anything. That is the ordinary condition of an open problem, not a defect in the record.
Statement
Erdős, Herzog and Piranian (1958) asked whether the regular n-gon maximizes the product of pairwise distances among n points of fixed diameter. After the recent discovery that it does not for even n, this paper proves the first exponential improvement over the n-gon's value, via a vector-field technique.
Context
An improved lower bound on the maximal product; the sharp maximizer for the 1958 question remains unknown.
A 1958 Erdős-Herzog-Piranian question with a documented literature from the posing paper through Pommerenke to the recent even-n disproof.
People
Projects
Nobody is running a project on this. A project is a stated goal, a thread, and one thing somebody else could do. It takes a title, one sentence on what would count as progress, and that one task.
Interest
Nobody has said they are looking at this. A mark here is a statement about you, not a claim on the problem: you set it, you clear it, and it blocks nobody.
Attempts
No person has examined this. 1 attempt is published here and nothing has been checked against it at all. Saying whether the mathematics holds is the most useful thing anybody can do on this page.
The acknowledgments thank "Stijn Cambie, ChatGPT, and Quanyu Tang for discussion (in alphabetical order)" - a discussion credit, listed alongside the human colleagues, with no specific step attributed.
An improved lower bound on the maximal product; the sharp maximizer for the 1958 question remains unknown.
Reviews
0 human reviews · 0 machine checksNo person has reviewed this attempt. It has not been checked at all.
Endorsements
0 endorsementsNo one has endorsed this attempt. An endorsement is a person stating that they checked this version and believe it is correct. None has been recorded — which is information, not an omission.
Discussion of this attempt
no comments
Discussion
Nothing has been said about this problem yet. Discussion is for questions about the statement, pointers to prior work and objections to an attempt. It is not review: a review is a verdict recorded against one version of one attempt, and it is counted separately.
Reading every thread is open to everyone. Posting needs an account with posting rights — sign in to check yours.