Lower bound for "Carmichael-gaps"?

40 Views Asked by At

Let $C$ be a Carmichael-number and $D$ the next larger Carmichael-number. Define $$d:=D-C$$ the "Carmichael-gap" analogue to the prime-gap and define $$r(C):=\frac{\ln(d)}{ln(C)}$$

Is this measure $r$ for the magnitude of the Carmichael-gaps bounded from below by some positive constant ? Or can it get arbitary small ?

The "jumping champions" upto $10^{16}$ are :

561  1105   544   0.99513854415920529069297505122613733452
1105  1729   624   0.91845279474907703929405663875235214559
1729  2465   736   0.88544142550502624476809166095976954681
2465  2821   356   0.75223694422010723491272040202550791362
62745  63973   1228   0.64390774746904012158853991518318110372
656601  658801   2200   0.57456582883692295131879220385500549080
4903921  4909177   5256   0.55610659670066835361057221495440590042
6049681  6054985   5304   0.54921121250212586428868981623071540180
8719309  8719921   612   0.40152130566050285575474067969645202654
214850881  214852609   1728   0.38856102392325088026485935143416117813
448238792737  448238823901   31164   0.38567133459503335323705627312210629442
4694439323701  4694439367801   44100   0.36652392379576449406917523790330483820
593961500246401  593961500298673   52272   0.31936823540412766301267893738903335990

I remember a gap from a user that probably beats this below $2^{64}$.

How can we find small gaps systematically ? Or do we just have to go through all the Carmichael-numbers to find the most spectacular examples ?