New conjecture about Mersenne primes

tetramur · 2019-01-20, 15:47

William Bouris claimed in his mad proofs, that:
"if p= 4*k+1, and q= 2*p+3 are both prime, then if [(M_r)^p-p] mod q == N, and q mod N == +/-1, then (M_r), the base, is prime. also, if (M_r) mod p = 1, then choose a different 'p' or if N is a square, then (M_r) is prime."
The source site has been broken about four months ago. How could this claim be proven/disproven?

tetramur · 2019-01-20, 17:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by tetramur

William Bouris claimed in his mad proofs, that:
"if p= 4*k+1, and q= 2*p+3 are both prime, then if [(M_r)^p-p] mod q == N, and q mod N == +/-1, then (M_r), the base, is prime. also, if (M_r) mod p = 1, then choose a different 'p' or if N is a square, then (M_r) is prime."
The source site has been broken about four months ago. How could this claim be proven/disproven?

Easy - disproven.
Counterexample:
Take r = 1279 (prime), p = 557, q = 1117.
((M_1279)^557-557) mod 1117 = 713
1117 mod 713 = 404, not +/-1
713 is not square
M_1279 mod 557 = 269

2019-01-20, 15:47	#1
tetramur "unknown" Jan 2019 anywhere 17 Posts	New conjecture about Mersenne primes William Bouris claimed in his mad proofs, that: "if p= 4k+1, and q= 2p+3 are both prime, then if [(M_r)^p-p] mod q == N, and q mod N == +/-1, then (M_r), the base, is prime. also, if (M_r) mod p = 1, then choose a different 'p' or if N is a square, then (M_r) is prime." The source site has been broken about four months ago. How could this claim be proven/disproven?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Conjecture about Mersenne primes and non-primes v2	Mickey1	Miscellaneous Math	1	2013-05-30 12:32
A conjecture about Mersenne primes and non-primes	Unregistered	Information & Answers	0	2011-01-31 15:41
A conjecture on a new property of Mersenne primes	Thiele	Math	18	2010-05-23 05:35
Mersenne Conjecture	sascha77	Math	15	2010-05-08 00:33
The New Mersenne Conjecture	Dougy	Math	32	2008-10-26 07:17