Briana H.
asked 12/07/12Let p > 3 be a prime, and suppose that p = 3 (mod 4). If q = 2p+1 is also prime show that (2^p) -1 is never prime.
Need help with this promblem for number theory
1 Expert Answer
Roman C. answered 12/08/12
Masters of Education Graduate with Mathematics Expertise
First of all, a well known theorem:
If p is a prime, and x2 ≡ y2 mod p, then either x ≡ y mod p or x ≡ -y mod p.
This can be seen as follows using Euclid's Lemma:
x2 ≡ y2 mod p
x2 - y2 ≡ 0 mod p
(x-y)(x+y) ≡ 0 mod p
x-y ≡ 0 mod p or x+y ≡ 0 mod p
x ≡ y mod p or x ≡ -y mod p
Now we can calculate as follows given 2p+1 is also prime.
22p ≡ 1 mod (2p+1)
2p ≡ 1 mod (2p+1) or -1 mod (2p+1)
Assume that 2p ≡ -1 mod (2p+1). Then
2p-1 ≡ p mod (2p+1).
Because p-1 is even, this says that p is a quadratic residue modulo 2p+1.
Note that there is no good way to type in legendre symbol But I will write (a/p).
By quadratic reciprocity theorem, (p/2p+1)(2p+1/p) = (-1)(2p+1-1)(p-1)/4 = (-1)p(p-1)/2
which is -1 when p ≡ 3 mod 4 which is the case in this problem.
Thus (p/2p+1) = -(2p+1/p) = -(1/p) = -1.
So p is a quadratic nonresidue mod (2p+1) which means that 2p ≠ -1 mod (2p+1).
The only conclusion is that 2p ≡ 1 mod (2p+1). Thus (2p+1) | (2p-1). Since for p>3, 2p+1 < 2p-1, we get that 2p-1 is composite.
Still looking for help? Get the right answer, fast.
Get a free answer to a quick problem.
Most questions answered within 4 hours.
OR
Choose an expert and meet online. No packages or subscriptions, pay only for the time you need.
Roman C.
I will try to figure this out for you. But my analysis of small cases suggests that p doesn't need to be prime.
As long as p = 3 mod 4 and q=2p+1 is prime, q will be a factor of 2p-1. Proving this would prove the conjecture because 2p+1 < 2p-1 when p>3.
12/07/12