Show that k is an odd integer, except when k=2

  • Thread starter Thread starter Math100
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integer
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on proving that if p=2^k-1 is prime, then k must be an odd integer, except when k=2. The proof begins by assuming k is even, leading to the expression p=4^a-1, which can be factored. It is established that 3 divides p for any even k greater than 2, implying p must equal 3, which forces k to equal 2, contradicting the assumption that k is not odd. Thus, the conclusion is reached that k must indeed be odd, except for the case when k=2. The conversation also emphasizes the importance of clarity and conciseness in mathematical proofs.
Math100
Messages
816
Reaction score
229
Homework Statement
Another unproven conjecture is that there are an infinitude of primes that are ## 1 ## less than a power of ## 2 ##, such as ## 3=2^{2}-1 ##.
If ## p=2^{k}-1 ## is prime, show that ## k ## is an odd integer, except when ## k=2 ##.
Relevant Equations
None.
Proof:

Suppose for the sake of contradiction that ## p=2^{k}-1 ## is prime
but ## k ## is not an odd integer.
That is, ## k ## is an even integer.
Then we have ## k=2a ## for some ## a\in\mathbb{Z} ##.
Thus ## p=2^{k}-1
=2^{2a}-1
=4^{a}-1. ##
Note that ## 3\mid 4^{n}-1 ## for all ## n\geq1 ##.
This means ## 3 ## divides ## p ##,
and so ## p ## must be ## 3 ##,
because ## p ## is a prime number.
Now we have ## p=2^{k}-1
=3 ##,
which implies that ## 2^{k}=3+1=4 ##,
so ## k=2 ##.
Since ## k\neq2 ##,
it follows that ## p\neq3 ##.
This is a contradiction because p cannot be a composite,
given the fact that ## p=2^{k}-1 ## is prime.
Therefore, if ## p=2^{k}-1 ## is prime,
then ## k ## is an odd integer, except when ## k=2 ##.
 
  • Like
Likes usermaths
Physics news on Phys.org
You've got to tidy that up!
 
PeroK said:
You've got to tidy that up!
But how?
 
Math100 said:
But how?
Review and edit. It's something you need to learn to do.
 
Math100 said:
But how?
Rule of thumb: write it in a way that convinces yourself, then delete all but every third row :wink:

Concentrate on the crucial lines:

E.g.: Assume ##p=2^k-1## is prime and assume ##k=2m >3.##

This gets you directly to your fifth line and everything is said, including the contradictional assumption.

Now you get ##p=4^m-1=(4-1)\cdot (\ldots) ## and so on.

You get the dots by using long division on ##(4^m-1):(4-1)## or in general ##(x^m-1):(x-1)## which is a valuable exercise anyway, since the formula is often used, and long division a method you should know.
 
  • Like
Likes Math100
Math100 said:
Homework Statement:: Another unproven conjecture is that there are an infinitude of primes that are ## 1 ## less than a power of ## 2 ##, such as ## 3=2^{2}-1 ##.
If ## p=2^{k}-1 ## is prime, show that ## k ## is an odd integer, except when ## k=2 ##.
Relevant Equations:: None.

Proof:

Suppose for the sake of contradiction that ## p=2^{k}-1 ## is prime
but ## k ## is not an odd integer.
That is, ## k ## is an even integer.
Then we have ## k=2a ## for some ## a\in\mathbb{Z} ##.
Thus ## p=2^{k}-1
=2^{2a}-1
=4^{a}-1. ##

2^{2a} - 1 is a difference of squares. Do you recall that x^2 - y^2 = (x+y)(x - y)?
 
  • Like
Likes usermaths and Math100
pasmith said:
2^{2a} - 1 is a difference of squares. Do you recall that x^2 - y^2 = (x+y)(x - y)?
Yes.
 
fresh_42 said:
Rule of thumb: write it in a way that convinces yourself, then delete all but every third row :wink:

Concentrate on the crucial lines:

E.g.: Assume ##p=2^k-1## is prime and assume ##k=2m >3.##

This gets you directly to your fifth line and everything is said, including the contradictional assumption.

Now you get ##p=4^m-1=(4-1)\cdot (\ldots) ## and so on.

You get the dots by using long division on ##(4^m-1):(4-1)## or in general ##(x^m-1):(x-1)## which is a valuable exercise anyway, since the formula is often used, and long division a method you should know.
So you're saying that after fifth line in my proof, I should revise it into another method?
 
I only said what I thought. It is a reflex if I see ##x^m -1.## It is the formula that is used for interest rates:
$$
\sum_{k=0}^{m-1} r^k = \dfrac{r^m-1}{r-1}
$$
As I said, this formula and the method of long division are valuable tools.

A faster method has been given to you in post #6.

Your method is the same, only that you did not provide evidence for ##3\,|\,4^m-1.## My method and the one in post #6 provide this evidence. Other methods are a proof by induction or modular arithmetics:
$$
4^m-1 \mod 3 \equiv (4\mod 3)^m-1 =1^m-1=0 \Longrightarrow 3\,|\,4^m-1
$$

Once you have ##3\,|\,p## you automatically have ##3=p## since ##p## is prime and so ##k=2##, contradicting the assumption.

All you have written can be compressed into that line.
 
  • Like
Likes Math100
  • #10
I wouldn't write this as a proof by contradiction. You derive a contradiction. It's a problem here because you want to derive a contradiction from:

Math100 said:
Suppose for the sake of contradiction that p=2k−1 is prime
but k is not an odd integer.
You never derive a contradiction to the complete statement.

It would be much simpler to start with "k is even and p = prime)" and derive k=2 from that.
 
  • Like
Likes PeroK