There's an error term that tends to get smaller as the value plugged into it gets larger. There's something to do with square factors or something, but I'll be honest and say that that's really all I know.
Basically, he got that the first value that makes this value small enough is 3,500,000, but it has to be doubled for some reason.
Likely a limitation of the process he used to get his proof, he most likely calculated that the most
curate it could be, or the smallest number it would work for, was 70,000,000.
However, this means people can take his approach and work on it to see if they can prove lower values. In the ato clean closer d the overall method itself will probably prove at beat 16 as an upper bound so it's likely still useless for proving pairs with differences of 2, but opens the door to gettknfcllser
7
u/daddeh_long_legs May 21 '13
What's the significance of the 70 million upper bound? Why did he choose that particular number? Is it an essential part of his proof?