Consider the sequence of numbers ranging over $n$ of the form $k\cdot a^n + 1$ for a fixed, odd natural number $k$. The number $k$ is considered a Sierpinski number if the sequence determined by that $k$ contains no primes.

One way to show that such a $k$ is a Sierpinski number is to find a covering system of congruences for the sequence proving there are no primes in the sequence. The way to show that such a $k$ is not a Sierpinski number is to find one prime among the numbers in the sequence.

For those sequences where a prime has been found, that is, $k$ is not a Sierpinski number, is it known whether there could be infinitely many primes in that sequence?

If only a finite number of primes are expected to be in the sequence, then a covering system of congruences might work after a certain $n$ to show that the rest of the sequence contains only composite numbers.

Sierpinski showed that there are an infinite number of $k$ whose sequences contain no primes. My conjecture is that there can be at most a finite number of primes for any $k$, but I wonder if this has not already been resolved by someone or if someone has already made the conjecture.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This might be worth cross-posting in MathOverflow if it doesn't get a quick response here. $\endgroup$ – Justin Benfield Mar 14 '16 at 15:10
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Since we don't know whether there are even infinitely many Mersenne primes (of the form $2^n-1$, close enough), I doubt that this is known (alternatively, Fermat primes, of the form $2^n+1$, so $k=1$, also unknown whether or not there are infinitely many). $\endgroup$ – vrugtehagel Mar 14 '16 at 16:00
  • $\begingroup$ @Justin I'll see what response I get here and then cross-post it next week. Thanks for the suggestion. $\endgroup$ – Frank Hubeny Mar 14 '16 at 18:55
  • $\begingroup$ @vrugtehagel The Fermat primes would be a specific example of one of these sequences as you mention. I wonder if anyone has formulated a conjecture that all such sequences contain no more than a finite number of primes. I also wonder if anyone has found a $k$ for which a prime exists, but no more than finitely many primes can exist in the sequence. $\endgroup$ – Frank Hubeny Mar 14 '16 at 18:59

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.