In the discussion on proving that in Euclid's formula for perfect numbers, n must be prime, participants explore various approaches to the proof. One suggested method involves assuming n is composite and demonstrating that this leads to a contradiction regarding the primality of 2^n - 1. Another approach considers the implications of Fermat's Little Theorem in relation to prime divisors of n. The conversation highlights the complexity of the proof and the need for clarity on whether the goal is to show that n is relatively prime to 2^n - 1 or to establish that if 2^n - 1 is prime, then n must also be prime. Overall, the discussion emphasizes the mathematical intricacies involved in the proof of Euclid's formula.