mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Extra Stuff > Miscellaneous Math

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2018-02-28, 12:10   #1
JM Montolio A
 
Feb 2018

25×3 Posts
Default Are Mersenne numbers really square?

What do you think about it ?


JMMA
JM Montolio A is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2018-02-28, 15:56   #2
GP2
 
GP2's Avatar
 
Sep 2003

1010000101012 Posts
Default

You mean Mersenne numbers with prime exponents.

Nobody knows for sure.

If you ever find one that's non-square-free, then you automatically also find the third known Wieferich prime, and that would be a pretty big deal.
GP2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2018-02-28, 18:05   #3
CRGreathouse
 
CRGreathouse's Avatar
 
Aug 2006

2·2,963 Posts
Default

It's an interesting question. I seem to recall a weak consensus that there probably are Mersenne numbers with prime exponents which are not squarefree, but they may be extremely large. Does anyone here have an opinion?
CRGreathouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2018-02-28, 18:39   #4
science_man_88
 
science_man_88's Avatar
 
"Forget I exist"
Jul 2009
Dumbassville

836910 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CRGreathouse View Post
It's an interesting question. I seem to recall a weak consensus that there probably are Mersenne numbers with prime exponents which are not squarefree, but they may be extremely large. Does anyone here have an opinion?
(Mod(1,3)*j*p^2+Mod(2,3)*p)*k^2+(Mod(1,3)*j*p+Mod(2,3))*k+Mod(1,3)*j roots mod 3 is what it comes down to partially.
science_man_88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2018-02-28, 20:17   #5
Dr Sardonicus
 
Dr Sardonicus's Avatar
 
Feb 2017
Nowhere

2×52×71 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CRGreathouse View Post
It's an interesting question. I seem to recall a weak consensus that there probably are Mersenne numbers with prime exponents which are not squarefree, but they may be extremely large. Does anyone here have an opinion?
Many years ago, I heard that whether there are infinitely many Mersenne numbers that are squarefree was an open question. I may be misremembering, but if that actually is unknown, it would illustrate how difficult this sort of question may be.

Any non-squarefree Mersenne numbers with prime exponent certainly would be "extremely large," at least by my standards. As already pointed out, the exponent would be the next known Wieferich prime. The best known lower bound I could find in a quick online search was

A Wieferich Prime Search up to 6.7 × 1015.

From the abstract,

Quote:
This paper describes a new search algorithm for Wieferich primes using double-precision Montgomery arithmetic and a memoryless sieve, which runs significantly faster than previously published algorithms, allowing us to report that there are no other Wieferich primes p < 6.7 × 1015.
Dr Sardonicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2018-02-28, 20:21   #6
science_man_88
 
science_man_88's Avatar
 
"Forget I exist"
Jul 2009
Dumbassville

8,369 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JM Montolio A View Post
JMMA
Do you know about clock math ? If not you may not understand responses.
science_man_88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2018-02-28, 21:01   #7
CRGreathouse
 
CRGreathouse's Avatar
 
Aug 2006

172616 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Sardonicus View Post
Many years ago, I heard that whether there are infinitely many Mersenne numbers that are squarefree was an open question. I may be misremembering, but if that actually is unknown, it would illustrate how difficult this sort of question may be.
I could believe it! It's like abc implying infinitely many non-Wieferich primes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Sardonicus View Post
Any non-squarefree Mersenne numbers with prime exponent certainly would be "extremely large," at least by my standards. As already pointed out, the exponent would be the next known Wieferich prime. The best known lower bound I could find in a quick online search was

A Wieferich Prime Search up to 6.7 × 1015.
PrimeGrid got to 6.071319 × 1017 before they suspended their search last May.
CRGreathouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2018-02-28, 21:30   #8
GP2
 
GP2's Avatar
 
Sep 2003

29·89 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Sardonicus View Post
As already pointed out, the exponent would be the next known Wieferich prime.
It's not the exponent that would be the next Wieferich prime, but the non-square-free factor itself.

There is good reason to believe that all factors of size 64 bits or less of Mersenne exponents under 1 billion have already been found, either by TF or by user TJAOI, as well a considerable percentage of 65 bit factors. So all new Mersenne factors being discovered are in the 1020 range, which is beyond the range of the various exhaustive searches that were done by Dorais and Klyve, and I think also by PrimeGrid at one point.

So theoretically, every new factor we find has some infinitesimal chance of being the next Wieferich prime.
GP2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2018-02-28, 21:56   #9
Prime95
P90 years forever!
 
Prime95's Avatar
 
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL

3×2,377 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GP2 View Post
So theoretically, every new factor we find has some infinitesimal chance of being the next Wieferich prime.
The prim95 client and the PrimeNet server do not check for this. Perhaps mersenne.ca does (or could be upgraded to) check.
Prime95 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2018-02-28, 23:03   #10
GP2
 
GP2's Avatar
 
Sep 2003

29·89 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prime95 View Post
The prim95 client and the PrimeNet server do not check for this. Perhaps mersenne.ca does (or could be upgraded to) check.
But it would be trivially easy to implement this. It's a small variation on the checking that's already done to verify a factor.

If f is a factor of 2p−1, then 2p ≡ 1 (mod f).

In other words, that the modular exponentiation of (2,p,f) equals 1.

Modular exponentiation is available in various languages like PHP or Python, and also in the GMP library in the mpz_powm functions.

To check for Weiferich primes, you do the exact same thing, except using modulo f squared.

If the modular exponentiation of (2,p,f2) ever equals 1, it's time to prepare a press release.

From time to time I've run a check over the entire database of factors, it can be done quite quickly. But it would be better to do it each time a factor is reported.
GP2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2018-03-01, 13:07   #11
a1call
 
a1call's Avatar
 
"Rashid Naimi"
Oct 2015
Remote to Here/There

36018 Posts
Default

I think it is not impossible. So looking long enough should yield hits.
The Mersenne-Pseudoorimes are a subset of the more general form:
(k+1)^p-k^p
For positive integer k and prime p

As such
3^11-2^11 is divisible by 23^2
a1call is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Square Riesel numbers < 3896845303873881175159314620808887046066972469809^2 Citrix Math 8 2017-04-10 10:50
Square-freeness of Mersenne numbers Qubit Math 2 2014-05-02 23:51
square free Mersenne Numbers? kurtulmehtap Math 0 2012-09-17 13:04
Finding the square root of a large mersenne number Fusion_power Math 29 2010-10-14 17:05
Square numbers and binary representation ET_ Miscellaneous Math 40 2010-06-06 12:55

All times are UTC. The time now is 23:06.

Tue Oct 20 23:06:31 UTC 2020 up 40 days, 20:17, 0 users, load averages: 2.37, 2.18, 2.13

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.