Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

How to prove or disprove following statement :

Conjecture :

Every Mersenne prime number can be uniquely written in the form : $x^2+3 \cdot y^2$ ,

where $\gcd(x,y)=1$ and $x,y \geq 0$

Since $M_p$ is an odd number it follows that : $M_p \equiv 1 \pmod 2$

According to Fermat little theorem we can write :

$2^p \equiv 2 \pmod p \Rightarrow 2^p-1 \equiv 1\pmod p \Rightarrow M_p \equiv 1 \pmod p$

We also know that :

$2 \equiv -1 \pmod 3 \Rightarrow 2^p \equiv (-1)^p \pmod 3 \Rightarrow 2^p-1 \equiv -1-1 \pmod 3 \Rightarrow$

$\Rightarrow M_p \equiv -2 \pmod 3 \Rightarrow M_p \equiv 1 \pmod 3$

So , we have following equivalences :

$M_p \equiv 1 \pmod 2$ , $M_p \equiv 1 \pmod 3$ and $M_p \equiv 1 \pmod p$ , therefore for $p>3$

we can conclude that : $ M_p \equiv 1 \pmod {6 \cdot p}$


On the other hand : If $x^2+3\cdot y^2$ is a prime number greater than $5$ then :

$x^2+3\cdot y^2 \equiv 1 \pmod 6$

Proof :

Since $x^2+3\cdot y^2$ is a prime number greater than $3$ it must be of the form $6k+1$ or $6k-1$ .

Let's suppose that $x^2+3\cdot y^2$ is of the form $6k-1$:

$x^2+3\cdot y^2=6k-1 \Rightarrow x^2+3 \cdot y^2+1 =6k \Rightarrow 6 | x^2+3 \cdot y^2+1 \Rightarrow$

$\Rightarrow 6 | x^2+1$ , and $ 6 | 3 \cdot y^2$

If $6 | x^2+1 $ then : $2 | x^2+1$ , and $3 | x^2+1$ , but :

$x^2 \not\equiv -1 \pmod 3 \Rightarrow 3 \nmid x^2+1 \Rightarrow 6 \nmid x^2+1 \Rightarrow 6 \nmid x^2+3 \cdot y^2+1$ , therefore :

$x^2+3\cdot y^2$ is of the form $6k+1$ , so : $x^2+3\cdot y^2 \equiv 1 \pmod 6$


We have shown that : $M_p \equiv 1 \pmod {6 \cdot p}$, for $p>3$ and $x^2+3\cdot y^2 \equiv 1 \pmod 6$ if $x^2+3\cdot y^2$ is a prime number greater than $5$ .

This result is a necessary condition but it seems that I am not much closer to the solution of the conjecture than in the begining of my reasoning ...

share|improve this question
    
I understand that the answer given by Andre is good but I've read your arguments and there is one leak when you say that $6 \, | \, x^2 + 3y^2 + 1$ implies that $6 \, | \, x^2 + 1$ and $6 \, | \, 3y^2$ ; unless I missed something, $a \, | \, b+c$ does not imply $a \, | \, b$ and $a \, | \, c$ in general. –  Patrick Da Silva Jan 3 '12 at 16:29
    
Good point, anyhow that can be fixed, because his argument is based on the fact that $x^2+1$ is not a multiple of $3$. That part of the argument should read: $6 | x^2+3 \cdot y^2+1 \Rightarrow 3 | x^2+1$ which leads to the contradiction... –  N. S. Jan 3 '12 at 16:39
    
@PatrickDaSilva,@N.S.,In my opinion both of you are right... –  pedja Jan 3 '12 at 16:47
    
@N.S. I didn't think about it much more, but yes, that could do it. Good point to you too. –  Patrick Da Silva Jan 3 '12 at 17:08
add comment

2 Answers

up vote 4 down vote accepted

It is a theorem that may have been first proved by Euler (but was known to Fermat) that every prime $p$ of the form $6k+1$ can be expressed in the form $p=x^2+3y^2$, where $x$ and $y$ are integers.

This representability question has been discussed on StackExchange. Please see here for a compact complete proof by Ewan Delanoy.

share|improve this answer
    
,Happy new year !!! Where can I find proof of that theorem ? Have you any reference ? –  pedja Jan 3 '12 at 16:21
1  
@pedja, see Primes of the Form $x^2+ny^2$, by David Cox. –  lhf Jan 3 '12 at 16:27
    
@lhf,thanks.... –  pedja Jan 3 '12 at 16:33
add comment

(Outline of proof that, for prime $p\equiv 1\pmod 6$, there is one positive solution to $x^2+3y^2=p$.)

It helps to recall the Gaussian integer proof that, for a prime $p\equiv 1\pmod 4$, $x^2+y^2=p$ has an integer solution. It starts with the fact that there is an $a$ such that $a^2+1$ is divisible by $p$, then uses unique factorization in the Gaussian integers to show that there must a common (Gaussian) prime factor of $p$ and $a+i$, and then that $p$ must be the Gaussian norm of that prime factor.

By quadratic reciprocity, we know that if $p\equiv 1\pmod 6$ is prime, then $a^2=-3\pmod p$ has a solution.

This means that $a^2+3$ is divisible by $p$. If we had unique factorization on $\mathbb Z[\sqrt{-3}]$ we'd have our result, since there must be a common prime factor of $p$ and $a+\sqrt{-3}$, and it would have to have norm $p$, and we'd be done.

But we don't have unique factorization in $\mathbb Z[\sqrt{-3}]$, only in the ring, R, of algebraic integers in $\mathbb Q[\sqrt{-3}]$, which are all of the form: $\frac{a+b\sqrt{-3}}2$ where $a=b\pmod 2$.

However, this isn't really a big problem, because for any element $r\in R$, there is a unit $u\in R$ and an element $z\in\mathbb Z[\sqrt{-3}]$ such that $r=uz$.

In particular, then, for any $r\in R$, the norm $N(r)=z_1^2+3z_2^2$ for some integers $z_1,z_2\in \mathbb Z$.

As with the Gaussian proof for $x^2+y^2$, we can then use this to show that there is a solution to $x^2+3y^2=p$. To show uniqueness, you need to use properties of the units in $R$.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.