The Last Occurrence of any Greatest Prime Factor

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the quest to identify the last occurrence of a prime number as the greatest prime factor between two consecutive integers, specifically through the function n_last = f(p). Participants explore examples, such as the prime number 7, and reference Størmer's theorem, which asserts that there exists a largest pair for every prime. The conversation highlights the complexity of finding such pairs and the potential for unsolved questions in number theory related to this topic.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of prime factorization
  • Familiarity with Størmer's theorem
  • Basic knowledge of number theory concepts
  • Experience with conjectures and proofs in mathematics
NEXT STEPS
  • Research Størmer's theorem and its implications in number theory
  • Explore the concept of prime factorization in consecutive integers
  • Investigate existing conjectures related to prime factors and integer pairs
  • Examine heuristic arguments for the existence of maximum prime factors
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, number theorists, and students interested in prime factorization and its applications in theoretical mathematics.

DuckAmuck
Messages
238
Reaction score
40
If you have 2 integers n and n+1, it is easy to show that they have no shared prime factors.
For example: the prime factors of 9 are (3,3), and the prime factors of 10 are (2,5).
Now if we consider 9 and 10 as a pair, we can collect all their prime factors (2,3,3,5) and find the maximum, which is 5. But where is the last occurrence of 5 as the maximum prime factor between two neighboring integers? Is there a known way to compute this, or to get a bound on it?

Essentially what I am looking for is a function that take a prime and tells me which integer n is part of the last pair of integers that have that prime as the greatest prime factor.

n_last = f(p)
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
What do you mean exactly? Let's take 7 as an example. It's the largest prime factor in (6,7),(7,8),(14,15),(20,21),(27,28),(35,36),(48,49),(49,50), and whatever which pairs. Now are you asking about the maximal integer of all possible pairs?

I don't think it has been investigated or that there is a formula. I'm not even sure, whether there is a maximum at all.
 
Yes, that is correct, 7 is the largest prime factor present in the pairs (6,7),(7,8),(14,15),(20,21),(27,28),(35,36),(48,49),(49,50). But where does this stop? Is there some integer n such that factoring the pair (n,n+1) gives you the last instance of 7 being the largest prime factor?
 
I doubt it. We still could have an expression ##2^k3^m5^n\cdot 7^l - 2^{k'}3^{m'}5^{n'} = 1## with arbitrary ##k,m,n,l,k',m',n'## which is a real big number of possibilities. So unless there isn't some use of such question in number theory, I doubt that anyone has considered this question.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: QuantumQuest and DuckAmuck
It could become a big number of possibilities, but remember that if k > 0, then k' = 0, since n and n+1 do not share prime factors. So the number of combinations to evaluate is 2^a, where a is the number of primes below 7 (or whatever prime you are considering).
 
For 2 and 3 this is Catalan's conjecture - now a theorem. There are only three pairs without larger prime factors: The trivial (2,3), then (3,4) and finally (8,9). The proof was difficult and quite recent. There is a good chance that more general questions (like this) are still unsolved. You could check some small numbers or look for heuristic arguments to see if such a maximum exists at all.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: QuantumQuest and DuckAmuck
mfb said:
There is a good chance that more general questions (like this) are still unsolved.
But before you, @DuckAmuck , suggest a DuckAmuck conjecture, please make sure it isn't trivial on one hand, and solvable on the other. Will say, "Find a function" isn't a good conjecture. Better would be something like: For every ##p## there is a number ##N## such that ##p \,\mid \, N \cdot (N+1)## and ##p \,\nmid \, M \cdot (M+1)## for all ##M>N##, and all for ##q>p## : ##q\,\nmid\,N \cdot (N+1)\,.##

And no, the pun with the margin isn't funny anymore!
 
Last edited:
fresh_42 said:
Better would be something like: For every ##p## there is a number ##N## such that ##p \,\mid \, N \cdot (N+1)## and ##p \,\nmid \, M \cdot (M+1)## for all ##M>N\,.##
That is certainly wrong as ##p \,\mid \, pM \cdot (pM+1) \forall M##. The conjecture would be:

For every prime p there is a number N such that M(M+1) for M>N always has a prime factor larger than p.

For p=3 we know it is true. For p=5 I checked all numbers up to 10 million. 2,3,4,5,6,9,10,16,25,81 are the only numbers where N and N-1 has no larger prime factor. So many numbers close together and then nothing for a very long time suggests this set is complete. I found it on oeis shifted by 1, and it turns out that someone called Størmer proved it is finite. But OEIS knows even more:

Yes, there is a largest pair for every prime

Størmer's theorem provides a way to find all these pairs.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: fresh_42

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
5K