geometry-topology / Sphere packing

Tightness of the Cohn-Elkies Bound in Dimension 36

Can a Cohn-Elkies auxiliary function certify the best known sphere packing in dimension $36$ as optimal? No. An explicit dual-feasible point for the Cohn-Elkies linear program, built from weight-$18$ modular forms for $\Gamma_0(24)$, shows the two-point linear programming bound in dimension $36$ exceeds the density of the Kschischang-Pasupathy packing by a factor of at least $32.91$.

25Significance / 100
1Frontier events
0Verification tasks
0Recorded attempts

Temporal state

Current frontier

No reconciled state yet.

Append-only history

Frontier timeline

Research memory

Claims and attempts

Scoped claims

Source authenticated

Can a Cohn-Elkies auxiliary function certify the best known sphere packing in dimension $36$ as optimal? No. An explicit dual-feasible point for the Cohn-Elkies linear program, built from weight-$18$ modular forms for $\Gamma_0(24)$, shows the two-point linear programming bound in dimension $36$ exceeds the density of the Kschischang-Pasupathy packing by a factor of at least $32.91$.

rules out the two-point LP method in this dimension; the optimal packing in dimension 36 remains unknown

Recorded attempts

Evidence graph

Connected research record

No public relationships recorded yet.

Tightness of the Cohn-Elkies Bound in Dimension 36 — Mathematical Frontier Network