Prime Numbers: (2^n - 1) and (2^n + 1)

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on proving two mathematical statements regarding prime numbers: (1) If \(2^n - 1\) is prime, then \(n\) must be prime, and (2) If \(2^n + 1\) is prime for \(n \geq 1\), then \(n\) must be of the form \(2^k\) for some positive integer \(k\). The proofs utilize contrapositive reasoning and polynomial factorization techniques, specifically the factorization of \(x^k - 1\) and \(x^k + 1\). The participants seek alternative proofs and clarifications on the factorization methods used.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of prime numbers and their properties
  • Familiarity with contrapositive reasoning in mathematical proofs
  • Knowledge of polynomial factorization, particularly \(x^k - 1\) and \(x^k + 1\)
  • Basic understanding of the Binomial Theorem
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore advanced topics in number theory, focusing on Mersenne primes
  • Study the applications of the Binomial Theorem in polynomial expansions
  • Research alternative proofs for properties of prime numbers
  • Learn about the implications of prime factorization in algebraic structures
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students studying number theory, and anyone interested in the properties of prime numbers and polynomial factorization techniques.

smithg86
Messages
58
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I was able to prove both of these statements after getting some help from another website, but I am trying to find another way to prove them. Can you guys check my work and help me find another way to prove these, if possible? Thanks.

Part A: Show that if 2^n - 1 is prime, then n must be prime.

Part B: Show that if 2^n + 1 is prime, where n \geq 1, then n must be of the form 2^k for some positive integer k.

Homework Equations



(x^k) - 1 = (x - 1)*(x^(k-1) + x^(k-2) + ... + x + 1)

The Attempt at a Solution



Part A:

Write the contrapositive,
n is not prime (a.k.a. n is composite) ==> 2^n - 1 is composite
Assume n is composite. Let n = p*q, where neither p nor q are 1.
Then,
2^n - 1 = (2^p)^q - 1 = (2^p - 1)*((2^p)^(q-1) + (2^p)^(q-2) + ... + (2^p) + 1)

Note that 2^p - 1 > 1. Also, ((2^p)^(q-1) + (2^p)^(q-2) + ... + (2^p) + 1) > 1. So we have factored 2^n - 1, thus it is not prime. We have proved the contrapositive, so the original statement is true.

--------

Part B:

Note that if n is of the form 2^k, then n's prime factorization is only composed of 2's. Thus, the contrapositive of the original statement is as follows:

n = b*(2^k), where b is a positive odd number ==> 2^n + 1 is composite.

Let n = b*(2^k). Then,

2^n + 1 = 2^(b*(2^k)) + 1 = ((2^(2^k))^b + 1 = (2^(2^k) + 1)*{[(2^(2^k)]^(k-1) + [2^(2^k)]^(k-2) + ... + [2^(2^k)] + 1}

Observe that [2^(2^k) + 1)] > 1 and {[(2^(2^k)]^(k-1) + [2^(2^k)]^(k-2) + ... + [2^(2^k)] + 1} > 1. We have factored 2^n + 1, so it is composite. This proves the contrapositive of the original statement, so the original statement is true.

-------

Is there another way to prove either one of these statements?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Is there another way to prove either one of these statements?
Why would you want to? This is both a short and elementary solution. That is often considered to be the nicest proof.
 
Kummer said:
Why would you want to? This is both a short and elementary solution. That is often considered to be the nicest proof.

I thought it would provide more insight as to why the statements are true.
 
smithg86 said:

Part B:

Note that if n is of the form 2^k, then n's prime factorization is only composed of 2's. Thus, the contrapositive of the original statement is as follows:

n = b*(2^k), where b is a positive odd number ==> 2^n + 1 is composite.

Let n = b*(2^k). Then,

2^n + 1 = 2^(b*(2^k)) + 1 = ((2^(2^k))^b + 1 = (2^(2^k) + 1)*{[(2^(2^k)]^(k-1) + [2^(2^k)]^(k-2) + ... + [2^(2^k)] + 1}

Observe that [2^(2^k) + 1)] > 1 and {[(2^(2^k)]^(k-1) + [2^(2^k)]^(k-2) + ... + [2^(2^k)] + 1} > 1. We have factored 2^n + 1, so it is composite. This proves the contrapositive of the original statement, so the original statement is true.



Should it state

[(2^{2^{k}})^{b}+1]=(2^{2^{k}} + 1)([2^{2^{k}}]^{b-1} + [2^{2^{k}}]^{b-2} + ... + [2^{2^{k}}] + 1)?

Can someone prove the general case of this expansion via Binomial Theorem for me?
 
Last edited:
(x^k) - 1 = (x - 1)*(x^(k-1) + x^(k-2) + ... + x + 1)

Where does this factorization come from? I just need a link or something. Thanks.
 
the factorizations come fromm doing polynomial long division of x^n-1 and x^n+1 with x^p-1 and x^p+1 if n=pq

x^n-1 = (x^p-1)(x^{p(q-1)}+x^{p(q-2)}+\cdots +x^p+1)

The other equation should read:

x^n+1 = (x^p+1)(x^{p(q-1)}-x^{p(q-2)}+\cdots -x^p+1 )

With alternating signs.

Again this comes from polynomial long division, taking x^n+1 and dividing by x^p+1
 
For the first part I would start with setting out 2 =

There is nothing more elementary in math, but I have found someone at least got stuck in thinking of anything that 2 =

After that you do have to use the binomial theorem which was found easier.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K