Number Theory Homework: Prove ((2^m)-1) Not Divisor of ((2^n)+1)

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving that for positive integers M and N greater than 2, ((2^m)-1) is not a divisor of ((2^n)+1). The initial approach using the well-ordering principle was critiqued for lack of clarity and incorrect application. A more structured proof involves defining a set T of pairs (m,n) and demonstrating contradictions through modular arithmetic and integer properties. Key insights include using the lexicographic ordering of pairs and modular equivalences to establish the proof.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the well-ordering principle in mathematics
  • Familiarity with modular arithmetic and congruences
  • Knowledge of integer properties and divisibility
  • Ability to work with sets and lexicographic ordering
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the well-ordering principle and its applications in proofs
  • Learn about modular arithmetic and its use in number theory
  • Explore integer divisibility and properties of powers of 2
  • Investigate lexicographic ordering and its implications in mathematical proofs
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, particularly those studying number theory, educators looking for proof strategies, and anyone interested in advanced mathematical reasoning and problem-solving techniques.

halvizo1031
Messages
77
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



If M and N are positive integers >2, prove that ((2^m)-1) is not a divisor of ((2^n)+1)



Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



Is this correct? I use the well-ordering principle.

Let T be the set of all M,N positive integers greater than 2 such that ((2^m)-1)/((2^n)+1). Assume T is non-empty, then by the WOP, T must contain a smallest L element, call it((2^k)-1)/((2^L)+1). but (2^(k+1)-1)/(2^(L+1)+1) is in T. So, ((2^k)*(2^1)-1)/((2^L)*(2^1)+1). Thus, I have a contradiction.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Please use standard notation and don't skip steps. As written, your proof makes very little sense. Are you defining T as \{(m,n) : m,n>2 \text{ and } (2^m-1) \,|\, (2^n+1)\}? If so, you can't use the WOP because the WOP only applies to subsets of the positive integers. Also, "must contain a smallest L element, call it((2^k)-1)/((2^L)+1)" makes absolutely no sense.
 
I'm not really sure what you're doing so I'm going to give you some advice that resembles what I think you're trying.

Consider (as foxjwill suggested):
T = \{(m,n) \in \mathbb{Z}^2 | m,n > 2 \textrm{ and } 2^m-1 | 2^n +1\}
Let (m,n) be the least element in T in the lexicographic ordering. If m\geq n you should fairly be able to show a contradiction. So assume m<n, now
\frac{2^n+1}{2^m-1}
is an integer by assumption so:
\frac{2^{n-m}(2^m)+1}{2^m-1}=\frac{2^{n-m}(2^m-1)+2^{n-m}+1}{2^m-1}=2^{n-m} + \frac{2^{n-m}+1}{2^m-1}
is an integer. Using this you should be able to show (m,n-m) \in T.

The same thing can be done in modular arithmetic (but in your original post you seemed to prefer fractions), by using:
2^n \equiv -1 \pmod {2^m-1}
and
2^m \equiv 1 \pmod {2^m -1}
to show:
2^{n-m}\equiv -1 \pmod{2^m -1}
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
20
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K