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

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving properties related to prime numbers, specifically concerning the expressions \(2^n - 1\) and \(2^n + 1\). The original poster seeks alternative proofs for two statements: if \(2^n - 1\) is prime, then \(n\) must be prime, and if \(2^n + 1\) is prime (for \(n \geq 1\)), then \(n\) must be of the form \(2^k\) for some positive integer \(k\.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster presents a contrapositive approach to both statements and seeks alternative proofs. Some participants question the necessity of finding alternative proofs, suggesting that the existing proofs are already elementary and insightful. Others inquire about specific mathematical expansions and factorizations related to the problem.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants exploring different perspectives on the proofs. Some have provided clarifications on polynomial factorizations, while others are seeking further insights into the reasoning behind the statements. There is no explicit consensus on the need for alternative proofs, but the dialogue remains productive.

Contextual Notes

Participants are discussing the implications of composite numbers and their relation to the primality of the expressions in question. There are references to polynomial long division and the Binomial Theorem, indicating a deeper exploration of mathematical principles relevant to the problem.

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
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K