Number of distinct prime factors of a Double Mersenne number

aketilander · 2012-11-09, 19:49

I am trying to figure out a way to estimate the number of distinct prime factors of a Double Mersenne number. If I understand it rightly, for a specific number n the number of distinct prime factors x are:

ω (n) which is asymptotically equal to ln (ln n)

for a Double Mersenne number n=MMp:

ln(ln (2^(2^p-1)-1))

ignoring both "-1" since those parts will be infinitesimally small with growing p.

ln(2^p * ln(2)) =
ln(ln(2)) + p*ln(2) =
-0.367 + p*ln(2) =
-0.367 + 0.693*p

i.e. for MM127 (i.e. p=127) x=87.64

Maybe it may be argued that since both p and Mp are prime x may be a little smaller?

Have I understood this rightly or have I done something wrong?

If this is right the nice thing is that the estimated number of distinct prime factors of a MMp are directely proportional to p.

ewmayer · 2012-11-09, 21:16

Any such estimate needs to take into account the special "restricted" form of Mersenne factors, which in general will cause M(p) (and by extension M(M(p) for M(p) prime) to have a lower expected number of factors than a general odd number of similar size. Here is a paper I found via cursory online search - the paper itself is not so much of interest in the present context as are the references, several of which appear to have investigated the question you ask.

2012-11-09, 19:49	#1
aketilander "Åke Tilander" Apr 2011 Sandviken, Sweden 2·283 Posts	Number of distinct prime factors of a Double Mersenne number I am trying to figure out a way to estimate the number of distinct prime factors of a Double Mersenne number. If I understand it rightly, for a specific number n the number of distinct prime factors x are: ω (n) which is asymptotically equal to ln (ln n) for a Double Mersenne number n=MMp: ln(ln (2^(2^p-1)-1)) ignoring both "-1" since those parts will be infinitesimally small with growing p. ln(2^p * ln(2)) = ln(ln(2)) + pln(2) = -0.367 + pln(2) = -0.367 + 0.693p i.e. for MM127 (i.e. p=127) x=87.64 Maybe it may be argued that since both p and Mp are prime x may be a little smaller? Have I understood this rightly or have I done something wrong? If this is right the nice thing is that the estimated number of distinct prime factors of a MMp are directely proportional to p. Last fiddled with by aketilander on 2012-11-09 at 20:09*

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Special Form of Mersenne and Fermat Number Factors	michael	Math	31	2015-09-04 05:57
Estimating the number of prime factors a number has	henryzz	Math	7	2012-05-23 01:13
Some Properties of Mersenne Number Factors	princeps	Miscellaneous Math	18	2011-11-30 00:16
Number of Factors for a Mersenne Number	kurtulmehtap	Math	12	2010-05-03 14:02
Poulet numbers with 3 distinct prime factors	flouran	Math	10	2009-04-29 03:57

2012-11-09, 21:16	#2
ewmayer ∂²ω=0 Sep 2002 República de California 5×2,351 Posts	Any such estimate needs to take into account the special "restricted" form of Mersenne factors, which in general will cause M(p) (and by extension M(M(p) for M(p) prime) to have a lower expected number of factors than a general odd number of similar size. Here is a paper I found via cursory online search - the paper itself is not so much of interest in the present context as are the references, several of which appear to have investigated the question you ask.