Divisor Of Mersenne Number

Find the number of positive integers n > 1 n > 1 such that n n divides 2 n 1 2^n -1 .

0 1 2 3

This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and, finally, (c) loading the non-javascript version of this page . We're sorry about the hassle.

3 solutions

Jesse Nieminen
Oct 26, 2016

Let's solve this problem by dividing it into cases.

Case 1: n n is even .
If n n is even then 2 n 1 2^n - 1 must also be even since an even number cannot divide an odd number, but it is not possible for 2 n 1 2^n - 1 to be even when n > 1 n > 1 is a positive integer.
Hence, n n cannot be even .

Case 2: n n is odd .

Let's define p p to be the smallest prime factor of n n and clearly p 2 n 1 2 n 1 ( m o d p ) p \mid 2^n - 1 \Rightarrow 2^n \equiv 1 \pmod{p} .

Now let k k be the multiplicative order of 2 2 modulo p p .
Clearly k n k \mid n , but now by Fermat's Little Theorem k p 1 k \leq p-1 .
This implies that n n has a factor k k which is positive and smaller than p p which means that k = 1 k = 1 .
Now 2 1 ( m o d p ) 2 \equiv 1 \pmod{p} which clearly is impossible for any prime p p .
Hence, n n cannot be odd .

Since n n can be neither even nor odd , the answer must be 0 \boxed{0}

Fermat's little theorem is true only when p is a prime.

Daksh A Agarwal - 4 years, 7 months ago

Log in to reply

True, I'll try to find another approach.

Jesse Nieminen - 4 years, 7 months ago

Great fix! The motivation behind this approach is that the prime case is almost obvious (and was the first thing that Jesse wrote), but trying to extend to the composite odd case was harder. If so, looking at the smallest prime or the largest prime often leads to a contradiction.

Calvin Lin Staff - 4 years, 7 months ago
Abhishek Sinha
Dec 23, 2016

Since for any integer n 2 n\geq 2 , the number 2 n 1 2^n-1 is always an odd integer, it can't be divisible by an even integer. Thus, such an n n , if exists at all, must be odd. Now, we have by Fermat's little theorem, for any odd integer n n 2 ϕ ( n ) = 1 m o d ( n ) 2^{\phi(n)}=1 \mod (n) This implies (via division theorem), that such an integer n n must be divisible by ϕ ( n ) \phi(n) . But we know that, ϕ ( n ) = n p ( 1 1 p ) = n p p 1 p , \phi(n)= n \prod_{p} (1-\frac{1}{p})= n \prod_{p} \frac{p-1}{p}, where the product is over all prime factors of n n . Hence we require the following to be an integer n ϕ ( n ) = p p p 1 \frac{n}{\phi(n)}= \prod_{p} \frac{p}{p-1} But remember that p p 's are distinct primes, so can't be divisible by numbers of the form p 1 p-1 , unless p 1 = 1 p-1=1 , i.e., p = 2 p=2 , but then n n would be even, which is not the case. \blacksquare

Daksh A Agarwal
Oct 21, 2016

A solution can be found here

@Daksh A Agarwal Ah, what happened is that I deleted your solution because it was linking to a pdf. We only allow people to add 1 solution, which is why you didn't get the "add your solution here" box.

I've undeleted the solution. Can you edit it?

Calvin Lin Staff - 4 years, 7 months ago

Log in to reply

Yes. Is it fine if it links to a pdf, or should i post it separately? Thanks

Daksh A Agarwal - 4 years, 7 months ago

Log in to reply

Ideally, paste the Latex over, so that it's easily accessible for everyone. E.g. for those who are using the app on their phone, they are less inclined (or also might not be able) to click and download a pdf

Calvin Lin Staff - 4 years, 7 months ago

Log in to reply

@Calvin Lin Ok I will do that soon.

Daksh A Agarwal - 4 years, 7 months ago

0 pending reports

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...