Proving the Primality of (2^n)+1: A Number Theory Question

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that if (2^n) + 1 is prime, then n must be of the form 2^k, where k is a non-negative integer. The subject area is number theory, specifically focusing on properties of prime numbers and their relationships with powers of two.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of n being odd or even, with one participant attempting to establish a contradiction for odd n. Others suggest iterative reasoning and the use of the factor theorem to analyze even values of n. Questions arise regarding the classification of even integers and their properties in relation to primality.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with various approaches being proposed. Some participants have provided insights into potential methods, while others are seeking clarification on specific steps or references. There is no explicit consensus on a single approach yet.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the challenge of categorizing even integers and express uncertainty about the existence of a straightforward method to demonstrate the primality conditions for (2^n) + 1. References to external materials, such as a textbook, are mentioned but not elaborated upon.

miren324
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
I need help. I'm trying to prove that if (2^n)+1 is prime, then there exists an integer k>=0 such that n=2^k.

If n is odd, then (2^n)+1=(2^(2k+1))-(-1)^(2k+1)=(2+1)(stuff...)=(3)(stuff) so it's not prime, a contradiction. So I've knocked out half of the possible n's.

What I'm struggling with is where to go from here. Usually these problems go down the road of proving it doesn't work for all integers EXCEPT the ones I want it to work for. The problem is, I don't know how to divide even integers into two groups: those of the form 2^k and those not of the form 2^k. I don't know what integers such as 6, 10, 12, 14, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30, 34, 36, ... have in common so that I can use some trickery to show that, if n is one of those, 2^n+1 is no longer prime. My first thought was non-perfect powers, but 36=6^2 which cannot be put in the form 2^k.

Any help would be greatly appreciated here. If I've started wrong, as in there's another way to go about this proof that I'm missing, then let me know please.

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There is a beautiful proof to the problem. I just aint able to write it down over here, but go through the book, 'Elementary Number theory' by David M Burton. Its given over there!
 
miren324 said:
I need help. I'm trying to prove that if (2^n)+1 is prime, then there exists an integer k>=0 such that n=2^k.

I think I can extend your start into an iterative proof.

(first step is just tidying up the first case you proved)

If k is odd then [itex]x^k + 1[/itex] has a zero at [itex]x=-1[/itex] and hence, by the factor theorem, a factor of [itex](x+1)[/itex].

By the above if [itex]k_0[/itex] is odd then [itex]2^{k_0} + 1[/itex] has a factor of three (2+1). So if [itex]2^{k_0} + 1[/itex] is prime then either [itex]k_0=1[/itex] or [itex]k_0[/itex] is even.

(now extending iteratively)

If [itex]k_0[/itex] is even then write [itex]k_0 = 2 k_1[/itex]. Then [itex]4^{k_1} + 1[/itex] is prime, but once again if [itex]k_1[/itex] is odd then by the factor theorem [itex]4^{k_1} + 1[/itex] has a factor of five (4 +1). So either [itex]k_1=1[/itex] or [itex]k_1[/itex] is even.

If [itex]k_1[/itex] is even then write [itex]k_1 = 2 k_2[/itex] (hence [tex]k_0 = 4 k_2[/itex]). Then [itex]16^{k_2} + 1 =[/itex] is prime, but once again ... etc[/tex]
 
Last edited:
@Mandeep Deka: I have that book. Do you know where in the book this problem is? I don't remember seeing it, but of course I didn't look at every problem in the whole book.
 
Hi miren324, did you follow my (outline of a) proof?
 
Actually right now i don't have the book, so i don't remember where it is...
But if i not wrong it must have been in the chapter related to perfect numbers.. Just check!
 

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K