Does the Prime Factorial Conjecture Hold True for All Primes?

PFanalog57
Messages
384
Reaction score
0
Here is a tentative conjecture that needs to be tested.

[P! + P]/P^2 = INTEGER

if and only if P is a prime number

P! is P factorial, e.g. 3*2*1 , 5*4*3*2*1 , 7*6*5*4*3*2*1, etc...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This is true. P!+P = P((P-1)!+1). By Wilson's Theorem, which has been discussed, "Proof of Wilson's Theorem," under Number Theory, we have (P-1)! ==(-1) Modulo p if an only if p is prime. Thus the conjecture is correct.
 
Multiply the prime numbers in their correct sequence:

3*2 = 6 , 6 = 6

5*3*2 = 30 , 3+0 = 3

7*5*3*2 = 210 , 2+1+0 = 3

11*7*5*3*2 = 2310 , 2+3+1+0 = 6

13*11*7*5*3*2 = 30030 , 3+3 = 6

17*13*11*7*5*3*2 = 510510 , 5+1+0+5+1+0 = 12 , 1+2 = 3

etc...

etc...


23 ---> 6

29 ---> 3

31 ---> 3

37 ---> 3

41 ---> 6


Multiply the sequence of prime numbers then sum the digits[omit 1] of
the product until it is a single integer. It appears to be 3 or 6.
 
[P!+P]/P^2


[P! +P^2 +P]/P^2 = integers >=1 when P is 1 or prime?



[P!+P^3+P^2+P]/P^2 = integers >=1 when P is 1 or prime?



[P! + P^4 + P^3 + P^2 +P]/P^2 = integers >=1 when P is 1 or prime?



[P! + P^n + P^(n-1) + ...+ P]/P^2 = integers >=1 when P is 1 or prime?
 
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
Back
Top