![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
"Sam"
Nov 2016
22·83 Posts |
![]()
The Lucas-Lehmer test is a test for Mersenne Numbers 2^n-1.
2^n-1 is prime if and only if 2^n-1 divides S(4, n-2). Here S(4, n) = S(4, n-1)^2-2 starting with S(4, 0) = 4 now suppose we replace S(4, 0) = 4 with S(x, 0) = x. We get the following polynomial sequence S(x, 0) = x S(x, 1) = x^2-2 S(x, 2) = x^4-4*x^2+2 S(x, 3) = x^8-8*x^6+20*x^4-16*x^2+2 S(x, 4) = x^16-16*x^14+104*x^12-352*x^10+660*x^8-672*x^6+336*x^4-64*x^2-2 ... Now we see that the discriminant D of S(x, n) = 2^r where r = (n+1)*2^n-1 Since the exponent r is odd, each prime factor q dividing S(x, n) has the form k*2^(n+1)+-1. Now assume 2^n-1 divides S(4, n-2). This shows that each prime factor of 2^n-1 must have the form k*2^(n-1)+-1. Since k*2^(n-1)+-1 > sqrt(2^n-1) is always true for k > 0, there is no prime factor less than or equal to sqrt(2^n-1) with that form. By trial division test if c is composite, there exists a prime p < sqrt(c) that divides c. Therefore, 2^n-1 must be prime. Please feel free to comment, suggest, improve or ask on this. Thanks!!! Last fiddled with by carpetpool on 2017-07-30 at 00:31 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2
27×7×11 Posts |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
"Robert Gerbicz"
Oct 2005
Hungary
112·13 Posts |
![]() Quote:
This is very false, it fails even for n=3: 2 divides S(3), but you can't write 2 in the k*2^4+-1 form. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Modifying the Lucas Lehmer Primality Test into a fast test of nothing | Trilo | Miscellaneous Math | 25 | 2018-03-11 23:20 |
Lucas-Lehmer test proof etc. | science_man_88 | Miscellaneous Math | 48 | 2010-07-14 23:33 |
proof the lucas lehmer test | kurtulmehtap | Math | 13 | 2009-10-02 12:12 |
Lucas-Lehmer Test | storm5510 | Math | 22 | 2009-09-24 22:32 |
Lucas-Lehmer Test proof | alpertron | mersennewiki | 16 | 2006-03-18 07:23 |