Is a^2+c Always a Prime Number Under Certain Conditions?

  • Thread starter Thread starter shivakumar06
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formula Prime
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on whether the expression a^2 + c can yield a prime number under specific conditions, such as a being even and c being odd, or vice versa, while ensuring neither is a multiple of the same number and c is not a negative square. Participants argue that simply showing a number is odd does not guarantee it is prime, as demonstrated with examples where a^2 + c results in both prime and non-prime outcomes. The concept of prime numbers being a unique combination of powers of two is questioned, with clarifications that all integers can be represented in binary form, which does not restrict prime numbers. A proposed condition that a^2 - c should not be divisible by a - c is also examined, but fails to consistently yield prime results. Ultimately, the discussion concludes that the initial assertions do not sufficiently establish a reliable method for generating prime numbers.
shivakumar06
Messages
69
Reaction score
0
dear sir, i wish to know if i am correct. a^2+c can be a prime number provided if a is even then c is odd or vice versa, also a and c are not multiple of same number. and c is not a negative square of any number. finally prime number is unique combination of 1,2,and other powers of 2. each power of two is used only once. i wish to know if prime number is bound by it
thank you
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I don't think you have shown more than those are odd numbers. Showing that a number can be prime, because it's odd, is not terribly useful. For a = 3 and b = 2, you getg 11, which is prime. For a = 5 and b = 2 you get 27, which is not.

I don't understand your last two sentences.
 
shivakumar06 said:
finally prime number is unique combination of 1,2,and other powers of 2
Every integer can be expressed this way. It's the binary or 2-adic representation. (I assume you are talking about integers, although it is not quite clear to me, since you just say "numbers" and "negative squares".)
each power of two is used only once. i wish to know if prime number is bound by it
thank you
If you mean "once and only once" by "only once" it is wrong for ##1+2+4+8 = 15##.
If you mean "at most once" by "only once" it is wrong since all integers have such a representation.
So the final answer to your question seems to be: No.
 
Vanadium 50 said:
I don't think you have shown more than those are odd numbers. Showing that a number can be prime, because it's odd, is not terribly useful. For a = 3 and b = 2, you getg 11, which is prime. For a = 5 and b = 2 you get 27, which is not.

I don't understand your last two sentences.
sir if we add a condition that a^2-c should not be divisible a-c. will this satisfy condition for prime number?
 
What about ##a = 12## , ##c = 25## ? ##a## is even, ##c## is odd, they don 't have a common divisor, ## a - c = -13 ## does not divide ## a^2 -c = 144 - 25 = 119 = 7 * 17## and ##a^2 + c = 144 + 25 = 13^2## is not prime.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top