Let be the th prime number. Which of the statements is/are true?
A: There are infinite number of such that .
B: There are infinite number of such that .
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.
There are infinite number of prime numbers, such that it can be expressed in a 4 k − 1 for, where k is an integer.
First note that every n integer n ≡ 3 m o d 4 has a m divisor, where m ≡ 3 m o d 4 . (Since all of n 's divisors is odd, and then if each divisor of n makes 1 remainder when it is divided by 4 , then n would make 1 ∗ 1 ∗ 1 ∗ ⋯ ∗ 1 remainder when it is divided by 4 .) So suppose there are finite prime numbers which make 3 remainder ( m o d 4 ): p 1 , p 2 , … , p r . Let N = 4 p 1 p 2 p 3 … p r − 1 Then N has an x divisor, which can be expressed in a 4 l − 1 formula ( l is an integer), but then x ∣ 1 , which is a contradiction.
There are infinite number of prime numbers, such that it can be expressed in a 4 k + 1 for, where k is an integer.
By using congruence it is easy to prove that for every n integer n 2 + 1 has an x divisor which makes 1 remainder when it is divided by 4 . So suppose there are finite prime numbers which make 1 remainder ( m o d 4 ): p 1 , p 2 , … , p s . Let N = 4 ( p 1 p 2 p 3 … p s ) 2 + 1 Then N has an x divisor, which can be expressed in a 4 q + 1 formula ( q is an integer), but then there exist a p prime, where p ≡ 1 m o d 4 and p is not part of the p 1 , p 2 , … , p s sequence, which is a contradiction.