mersenneforum.org Counterexample to test ?
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 2020-01-18, 20:51 #1 carpetpool     "Sam" Nov 2016 311 Posts Counterexample to test ? Is anyone able to come up with a counterexample to the following test? I'm sure there are some, I just can't construct any. Please let me know. Define a(n) (case where b=1 see below) to be https://oeis.org/A116201 Let n = 2 mod 3 and Jacobi(13 | n) = -1. If a(n^2+1) = 0 mod n, then n is prime. In general, there should be an integer b such that Jacobi([4*b-7] | n) = -1 and Jacobi([b^2+4*b+8] | n) = -1 and a similar test would apply. This stems from the discriminant of the characteristic polynomial: x^4 + x^3 - b*x^2 - x + 1. This polynomial has discriminant (4*a - 7)^2*(a^2 + 4*a + 8). The reasoning for the above test is similar to that of Fermat's Little Theorem. If n is prime and: n = 1 mod 3, then a(n-1) divides n. n = 2 mod 3 and J(13 | n)=1, then a(n+1) divides n. n = 2 mod 3 and J(13 | n)=-1, then a(n^2+1) divides n. The first two conditions, counterexamples are easily construable. But the third is a little difficult. Here's how to construct one (if they exists): We all know the properties of Carmichael numbers: p-1 | N-1 for all primes p | N. And then there is something similar for other numbers N, which is that p+1 | N+1 for all primes p | N. And finally we look at integers N such that p^2+1 | N^2+1 for all primes p | N. While I have been able to verify that if N > 10^9 if such an N exists, I have not been able to prove that they exist. I imagine they would be very difficult to construct, but still possible. So if someone is able to prove that they do NOT exist at all, then the test is proved. Otherwise, it will remain a theoretical PRP test.
2020-01-19, 16:21   #2
Dr Sardonicus

Feb 2017
Nowhere

2·7·13·19 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by carpetpool Is anyone able to come up with a counterexample to the following test? I'm sure there are some, I just can't construct any. Please let me know. Define a(n) (case where b=1 see below) to be https://oeis.org/A116201
This paper may be pertinent regarding the existence of counterexamples. In particular, it proves that there are Carmichael numbers composed entirely of primes p for which the given polynomial (mod p) splits into linear factors.

Looking at the OEIS entry, I asked myself, "Why is this a divisibility sequence?"

The characteristic polynomial f = x^4 - x^3 - x^2 - x + 1 for the recurrence is a quartic with Galois group D4 (the dihedral group with 8 elements, AKA the "group of the square").

I knew that the sequence could be expressed in the form a(k) = trace(y*x^k) where y = Mod(p, f), with p a nonzero polynomial in x of degree less than 4.

Luckily, I know how to compute y. And what the computation showed was that for the given sequence, y^2 - 13 = 0. I'm sure that this is the key to the sequence being a divisibility sequence, but I'm too lazy to work out the details.

The field k1 = Q(sqrt(13)) is a subfield of the splitting field K of f; K/Q has degree 8. Also, f splits into two quadratic factors in k1[x], so K is a four-group extension of k1.

The splitting field K has two other quadratic subfields, k2 = Q(sqrt(-39)) and k3 = Q(sqrt(-3)). The polynomial f remains irreducible in k2[x] and k3[x], so K is a cyclic quartic extension of k2 and k3.

The field k3 is also the field of cube roots of unity.

The extension K/k2 is interesting because the class group of k2 is cyclic of order 4, and K is the Hilbert Class Field of k2.

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post Trilo Miscellaneous Math 25 2018-03-11 23:20 lidocorc Software 3 2008-12-03 15:12 swinster Software 2 2007-12-01 17:54 devarajkandadai Miscellaneous Math 3 2005-12-12 16:04 T.Rex Math 0 2004-10-26 21:37

All times are UTC. The time now is 09:20.

Sun Sep 20 09:20:39 UTC 2020 up 10 days, 6:31, 0 users, load averages: 1.29, 1.42, 1.44