Proving that (2^n) - 1 is Not Prime for Perfect Squares

In summary, the conversation discusses trying to prove that if n is a perfect square, then (2^n) - 1 is not prime. The conversation explores various methods and approaches, including factoring and using induction. The final attempt is to use the contrapositive statement, but it does not lead to a conclusive answer.
  • #1
mae
6
0
Prove that if n is a perfect square, then (2^n) -1 is not prime.

All I can get is that 2^n is some even number. I can't work in the perfect square part.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Well, you could try a couple and see ...
2^4-1=15=3*5
2^9-1=511=7*73
2^16-1=323767=7*31*151

You could at least write the expression as:
[tex]2^{k \times k}-1[/tex]

There's an easy answer when k is even.
 
  • #3
Unfortunately I have to prove it for every perfect square, and there are a lot of them.

I feel like I've tried everything. The last thing I tried was contrapositive : If (2^n)-1 is prime, then n is not a perfect square. No dice... at least for me.
 
  • #4
You could write it as (2^k)^k - 1. Can you think of a way to factorize it now?

By the way, primes of the form 2^n - 1 are called Mersenne primes. They're relatively well-known, and have many unsolved problems associated to them. For example, are there infinitely many Mersenne primes?
 
  • #5
*sigh* honestly I can't think of a way to factor it =(

I've been up all night and I can't really think straight anymore. I'm not sure that would help anyway though.
 
  • #6
Just some thoughts, btw I know zero number theory.

n = k^2
It is true for k=1, k=2. Assume it is true for some k. So 2^(k^2)-1 is not prime
For the next number k+1, n = k^2 + 2k +1, we have:

2^n - 1= 2^(k^2 + 2k +1) - 1 = 2^(k^2) + 2^(2k) + 1 = 2^n -1 + 2^(2k) +2

Er, then, I don't know what.
 
  • #7
Good ol' induction... I didn't try that before. But I took what you started and didn't really end up anywhere... just like everything else I've tried =( Thanks for the thought though.
 
  • #8
And I apologize for not showing my work, but most (nearly all) of it has been erased at this point, and it all was deadends. Thanks for your help guys. I'll let you know if/when I get an answer. Or you could put me at peace before that.
 
  • #9
Holy crap, I think I just got it.

Edit: I did not.


This is for contrapositive, which seems more promising.
I have 2^n -1 = p (some prime)
so... 2^n = p+1 (some even)
now, if only log[2](p+1) was something easy and neat.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
[tex]x-1=(x-1)(1)[/tex]
[tex]x^2-1=(x-1)(x+1)[/tex]
[tex]x^3-1=(x-1)(x^2+x+1)[/tex]
[tex]x^4-1=(x-1)(x^3+x^2+x+1)[/tex]
...
 

FAQ: Proving that (2^n) - 1 is Not Prime for Perfect Squares

What is the significance of proving that (2^n) - 1 is not prime for perfect squares?

The significance of this proof lies in the fact that it helps us better understand the patterns and properties of prime numbers. It also has applications in cryptography and number theory.

What is the current state of research on this topic?

There is ongoing research on this topic, with new discoveries and proofs being made. However, the proof for proving that (2^n) - 1 is not prime for perfect squares has been established and accepted by the mathematical community.

What is the process for proving that (2^n) - 1 is not prime for perfect squares?

The proof involves using mathematical techniques such as modular arithmetic, algebraic manipulations, and number theory concepts. It requires a deep understanding of prime numbers and their properties.

What are some potential challenges in proving that (2^n) - 1 is not prime for perfect squares?

One of the main challenges in this proof is finding a general formula or method that can be applied to all values of n to prove the statement. Additionally, the proof may involve complex mathematical concepts that require a high level of expertise to understand and apply.

What are the implications of this proof for other areas of mathematics?

The proof has implications for other areas of mathematics, such as number theory, cryptography, and algebra. It also opens up new avenues for further research and exploration in the field of prime numbers and their properties.

Similar threads

Back
Top