Understanding Prime Power Proofs

mlsbbe
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
Hi, I am having trouble understanding this proof.


Statement

If pn is the nth prime number, then pn \leq 22n-1


Proof:


Let us proceed by induction on n, the asserted inequality being clearly true when n=1. As the hypothesis of the induction, we assume n>1 and the result holds for all integers up to n.

Then

pn+1 \leq p1p2...pn + 1

pn+1 \leq 2.22...22n-1 + 1 = 21 + 2 + 22+ ...+ 2n-1

Recalling the indentity 1 + 2 +22+ ...+2n-1=2n-1

Hence

pn+1 \leq 22n-1+1

But 1 \leq 22n-1 for all n; whence

pn+1 \leq22n-1+22n-1
=2.22n-1
=22n
completing the induction step, and the argument.



What I don't understand is why the proof uses p1, p2, etc as powers of two. What is the nature of the pn? Are they prime or what? Why use powers?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In the proof , it is not that p1 , p2 , p3 have been replaced by powers of 2 . All that it is saying is that :

p1.p2.p3.p4...pn < 2 . (2^2) . (2^4) ... ( 2 ^ (2^n - 1 ) ).

This is because it is assuming the theorem to be true for p1 , p2 .. upto pn .
 
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Back
Top