
Number Theory Number Theory Math Forum 
 LinkBack  Thread Tools  Display Modes 
February 12th, 2009, 05:39 PM  #1 
Newbie Joined: Feb 2009 Posts: 4 Thanks: 0  Trying to make history, or at least understand primes better
Hi, everybody, I’m new here but I have been on other math forums. This one looks pretty active, so I thought I would ask if anyone has any ideas about a little conjecture of mine. I have been working for a number of years on this problem, which I have recently reframed into a question about a type of quadratic equation. If you have seen it on another forum before, it might have changed since I converted it into a quadratic eqn. Please take a look, and contemplate for a minute. Maybe something will "hit" you that I'm just not seeing. Here it is, in brief: Let p be a prime number > 7 and let n be the largest integer such that the nth prime (p_n) is less than root(p). Conjecture: For each such p there exists n positive integers (k_1, k_2, .... k_n), such that the equation x^2+pxc=0 has integer roots, where c = 2^k_1 * 3^k_2 * ... * (p_n)^k_n. ================================================== ======================= In case it helps, the original way of phrasing the conjecture went something like this: Let p and n and k_1…k_n be as given above. Then we can partition the set {p_1….p_n} into two disjoint sets, {p_i…..p_m} and {p_q….p_r}. Let A=(p_i)^(k_i)*…*(p_m)^(k_m) and let B=(p_q)^(k_q)*…*(p_r)^(k_r). In other words, A and B are relatively prime, p_n primorial divides AB, and no prime larger than p_n divides AB. Conjecture 1 (easy to prove) the absolute value of AB is prime as long it is less than the square of p_(n+1). Conjecture 2 (unproven) for ANY prime less than the square root of p_(n+1), for ANY n, we can find a set of positive integers {k_1…k_n} and a partition of {p_1…p_n} such that the construction: abs(AB) as given above will equal the given prime. Note that the variables here are the k’s, and the actual partition. In other words, the AB construction will always produce a prime (given the lessthan condition), but WILL it give EVERY prime less than the square of p_(n+1), given that we can change the exponents and the partition? ======================= Hopefully someone can help me see a way to attack this problem. I have looked at the quadratic formula until I'm blue in the face, obviously p^24c must be a perfect square. I have looked into matrices, I have tried to bring trig into it even. There seems to be patterns, but nothing that leads to a closed form for the exponents (that would be too much to expect, anyway). Since the options for exponents are unbounded, you might think that there would have to be a way to prove that SOME set of exponents would work for each p, and the quadratic looks like a simple enough approach. I have verified this out past 1000 and there simply must be a way to prove it or disprove it, once and for all. Please help, any ideas are welcome. Thank you. 
February 13th, 2009, 09:34 AM  #2  
Global Moderator Joined: Nov 2006 From: UTC 5 Posts: 16,046 Thanks: 938 Math Focus: Number theory, computational mathematics, combinatorics, FOM, symbolic logic, TCS, algorithms  Re: Trying to make history, or at least understand primes better Quote:
Working mod 9, you can show that 9  c, thus k_2 >= 2. I imagine similar things can be shown mod other prime powers. Have you tried this approach?  
February 18th, 2009, 06:50 PM  #3 
Newbie Joined: Feb 2009 Posts: 4 Thanks: 0  Re: Trying to make history, or at least understand primes better
Thank you for the idea, I should have thought of it before (actually I looked at it with 2, but not 3 or the others). Sorry I haven't had time to reply recently. I'll look into this approach, and thanks again! 
February 18th, 2009, 07:03 PM  #4 
Newbie Joined: Feb 2009 Posts: 4 Thanks: 0  Re: Trying to make history, or at least understand primes better
Okay, I can see that p^2, being odd and a square, must be congruent to 1 mod 6, and that p^2+4c, also being an odd square, must be congruent to 1 mod 6, but that just tells me that 4c is a multiple of 6, I'm still working on it but I don't get the "multiple of 9" part...

February 18th, 2009, 08:52 PM  #5 
Global Moderator Joined: Nov 2006 From: UTC 5 Posts: 16,046 Thanks: 938 Math Focus: Number theory, computational mathematics, combinatorics, FOM, symbolic logic, TCS, algorithms  Re: Trying to make history, or at least understand primes better
List the squares mod 9.

February 24th, 2009, 05:23 PM  #6 
Newbie Joined: Feb 2009 Posts: 4 Thanks: 0  disagree
x^2+13x48=0 has integer roots, yet 9 does not divide 48.

February 24th, 2009, 06:10 PM  #7 
Global Moderator Joined: Nov 2006 From: UTC 5 Posts: 16,046 Thanks: 938 Math Focus: Number theory, computational mathematics, combinatorics, FOM, symbolic logic, TCS, algorithms  Re: Trying to make history, or at least understand primes better
Oops, then? Maybe I switched from working mod 9 to mod 8 at some point.


Tags 
history, make, primes, understand 
Thread Tools  
Display Modes  

Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
primes and twin primes: Number between powers of 10  caters  Number Theory  67  March 19th, 2014 04:32 PM 
history  nikkor180  Calculus  0  April 29th, 2011 09:08 PM 
HELP!!! history of math  slick5657  New Users  2  June 11th, 2009 06:24 AM 
Listing primes: a personal history  CRGreathouse  Number Theory  0  November 6th, 2008 08:13 AM 
History of Mathematics  cknapp  New Users  10  January 23rd, 2008 06:01 PM 