View Single Post
2005-11-13, 13:13   #3
T.Rex

Feb 2004
France

929 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by T.Rex I've checked only with some q primes (109, 103, 101, 97, 83, 37, 13, 7) , but it seems that ...
This is stupid. It is the definition of d being a divisor of Mq. (I should learn more elementary Number Theory, spend more time searching by my-self, and thus say less garbage on this forum. Isn't it, Bob ?)

(In the examples, $\large (M_q)/2$ should be: $\large (M_q-1)/2$.)