Is (2n-1)! Always a Square Modulo 2n+1?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter killerinstinct
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Arithmetic
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around whether the factorial of (2n-1) is always a square modulo (2n+1). Participants explore this question through different cases based on the primality of (2n+1) and invoke concepts such as Wilson's theorem and the Legendre symbol.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that for non-prime (2n+1), every prime factor must be contained in (2n-1)!, leading to a remainder of zero, which is a perfect square.
  • Others argue that if (2n+1) is prime, Wilson's theorem implies that (2n-1)! is congruent to 1 modulo (2n+1), also a perfect square.
  • A later reply questions the initial claim regarding non-repeated prime factors, suggesting that repeated prime factors require a different argument to show that (2n-1)! has sufficient factors to cover them.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about the Legendre symbol and its relevance to the modular question at hand.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants present multiple competing views regarding the cases of primality and the implications for the factorial's properties modulo (2n+1). The discussion remains unresolved with no consensus reached.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include assumptions about the nature of prime factors and the specific cases considered, as well as the dependence on definitions related to the Legendre symbol and Wilson's theorem.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in number theory, particularly in modular arithmetic and properties of factorials, may find this discussion relevant.

killerinstinct
Messages
92
Reaction score
0
Show that (2n-1)! is always a square modulo 2n+1.
:cry:
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
what do you know about legendre's symbol?
 
I'd treat it as two separate cases.

Case 1: (2n+1) is non-prime.

In this case it is easy show that every prime factor of (2n+1) must be contained in (2n-1)! and hence the remainder is zero (a perfect square).



Case 2: (2n+1) is prime.

Let prime p = (2n+1).

By Wilson's Thm (see link), (p-1)! = (p-1) : modulo p

(p-2)!(p-1) = (p-1) : mod p

(p-2)! = 1 : mod p

Hence the remainder is always 1 (a perfect square) for this case.



In summary the remainder is always zero when (2n+1) is non-prime and is always one when (2n+1) is prime.


Link for Wilsons Thm
 
Last edited:
Quick errata :

In case 1 when I said, "it is easy show that every prime factor...", I have to admit that I was thinking specifically about non-repeated prime factors at the time, in which case the result really is trivial enough to be done "by inspection".

For the case where (2n+1) has repeated prime factors like q^m then you can use an argument along the lines of :

Assume (2n+1) has a prime factor of the form q^m, where q is prime >= 3 and m is integer >= 2.

BTW. Note that (2n+1) can't have 2 as a factor so we only need to look a 3 and greater. Also, since I'm looking specifically at the case of repeated factors I only need to consider m greater or equal to 2.

Since q^m is a factor then,
(2n+1) >= q^m
(2n-1) >= q^m - 2


But also it is easy to show that q^m - 2 > m*q for q>=3 and m>=2

Loosly what this means is that if (2n+1) has a repeated prime factor q^m then (2n-1)! has enough factors of the form q, 2q, 3q etc to "cover" it.
 
Last edited:
Legendre symbol? Heard of, but not know much about it. It could possibly explain this modular question?
 
thanks to uark for a detailed and well-given solution!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K