Browse Groups

• ... Right... of course! Bad example - that s not what I meant to say. Maybe, Is 8*n!^8+1 composite for all n 4 ? Probably not. Actually I don t mind at all.
Message 1 of 6 , Jul 1, 2009
View Source
>
> > For which n>1 is 4*n!^8 + 1 prime ??
>
> For none. Proof: Set x = (n!)^2 in the identity
> 4*x^4 + 1 = (2*x^2 + 1)^2 - (2*x)^2

Right... of course! Bad example - that's not what I meant to say.
Maybe,

Is 8*n!^8+1 composite for all n>4 ?

Probably not. Actually I don't mind at all. It was just to express the same "Moral" given elsewhere more explicitely. But I should have chosen my example more carefully...
At least this shows that the "32" is in some sense simply the 3rd possibiliy, after 2 and 8. For 2^7 there happen to be 3 small primes; for 2^9 and 2^11 only two. Thus, whenever the first prime is found for 2^5, then the same post can be made replacing 32 with 2^13.)

Maximilian
Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.
• Changes have not been saved
Press OK to abandon changes or Cancel to continue editing
• Your browser is not supported
Kindly note that Groups does not support 7.0 or earlier versions of Internet Explorer. We recommend upgrading to the latest Internet Explorer, Google Chrome, or Firefox. If you are using IE 9 or later, make sure you turn off Compatibility View.