Describe the Natural density of $p$ which divides natural numbers of the form $n^2+1$?Prime Divisors of $x^2 + 1$Show that the odd prime divisors of $n^2+1$ are of form $4k+1$“If $m$ divides two Fermat numbers, $m$ divides $2$.” Why?Describe the set of all good numbersWhat is the smallest natural number divisible by the first $n$ natural numbers?Prove that every odd natural number divides some number of the form $2^n - 1$Mental Primality TestingNumbers divisible by all of their digits: Why don't 4's show up in 6- or 7- digit numbers?Any composite natural number divides the product of two smaller natural numbersFractals using just modulo operationDescribe all natural numbers $n$ for which $3^n-2^n$ is divisible by $5$.Set of $n$ natural numbers $a_i$ such that: if $a_jlt a_k$, then $(a_k-a_j)mid a_j$
Is there really no realistic way for a skeleton monster to move around without magic?
GPS Rollover on Android Smartphones
Is Social Media Science Fiction?
How can I fix this gap between bookcases I made?
Do airline pilots ever risk not hearing communication directed to them specifically, from traffic controllers?
Why don't electron-positron collisions release infinite energy?
DOS, create pipe for stdin/stdout of command.com(or 4dos.com) in C or Batch?
What is the command to reset a PC without deleting any files
Why CLRS example on residual networks does not follows its formula?
How can I hide my bitcoin transactions to protect anonymity from others?
What is the logic behind how bash tests for true/false?
Copenhagen passport control - US citizen
A newer friend of my brother's gave him a load of baseball cards that are supposedly extremely valuable. Is this a scam?
How do we improve the relationship with a client software team that performs poorly and is becoming less collaborative?
How is this relation reflexive?
I probably found a bug with the sudo apt install function
How is it possible to have an ability score that is less than 3?
Can a German sentence have two subjects?
New order #4: World
Are there any consumables that function as addictive (psychedelic) drugs?
Set-theoretical foundations of Mathematics with only bounded quantifiers
What typically incentivizes a professor to change jobs to a lower ranking university?
Why is the design of haulage companies so “special”?
Is it possible to do 50 km distance without any previous training?
Describe the Natural density of $p$ which divides natural numbers of the form $n^2+1$?
Prime Divisors of $x^2 + 1$Show that the odd prime divisors of $n^2+1$ are of form $4k+1$“If $m$ divides two Fermat numbers, $m$ divides $2$.” Why?Describe the set of all good numbersWhat is the smallest natural number divisible by the first $n$ natural numbers?Prove that every odd natural number divides some number of the form $2^n - 1$Mental Primality TestingNumbers divisible by all of their digits: Why don't 4's show up in 6- or 7- digit numbers?Any composite natural number divides the product of two smaller natural numbersFractals using just modulo operationDescribe all natural numbers $n$ for which $3^n-2^n$ is divisible by $5$.Set of $n$ natural numbers $a_i$ such that: if $a_jlt a_k$, then $(a_k-a_j)mid a_j$
$begingroup$
We want to find the numbers that divide natural numbers in the form of $n^2+1$ and solve for their natural density.
Using Wolfram Mathematica, I found divisors from $n=0$ to $1000000$ and eliminated repeated divisors. Here is the list
$$left1,2,5,10,13,17,25,26,29,34,37,41,50,53,58,61,65,73,74,82,85,89,97,101,106,109,113,122,125,130,137,145,146,149,157,169,170,173,178,181,185,193,194,197,202,205,218,221,226,229,233,241,250,257,265,269,274,277,281..... right$$
After looking at the list extensively my guess is the density is zero.
Is there a mathematical way of finding this without computer programming?
divisibility
$endgroup$
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
We want to find the numbers that divide natural numbers in the form of $n^2+1$ and solve for their natural density.
Using Wolfram Mathematica, I found divisors from $n=0$ to $1000000$ and eliminated repeated divisors. Here is the list
$$left1,2,5,10,13,17,25,26,29,34,37,41,50,53,58,61,65,73,74,82,85,89,97,101,106,109,113,122,125,130,137,145,146,149,157,169,170,173,178,181,185,193,194,197,202,205,218,221,226,229,233,241,250,257,265,269,274,277,281..... right$$
After looking at the list extensively my guess is the density is zero.
Is there a mathematical way of finding this without computer programming?
divisibility
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– Aloizio Macedo♦
Mar 28 at 12:44
$begingroup$
@AloizioMacedo Why is my question still unclear?
$endgroup$
– Arbuja
Mar 28 at 21:15
1
$begingroup$
The divisors of $n^2+1$ are precisely the numbers not divisible by four and with no prime factor one less than a multiple of four. These are tabulated at oeis.org/A008784 and there are links there which may lead to an answer to your question.
$endgroup$
– Gerry Myerson
Mar 29 at 1:52
$begingroup$
Related: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1472923/prime-divisors-of-x2-1 and math.stackexchange.com/questions/926561/…
$endgroup$
– Gerry Myerson
Mar 29 at 1:57
3
$begingroup$
I would suggest eliminating your initial general question, which is hopelessly broad. The specific question about numbers of the form $n^2+1$ is a perfectly good question though.
$endgroup$
– Eric Wofsey
Mar 29 at 3:52
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
We want to find the numbers that divide natural numbers in the form of $n^2+1$ and solve for their natural density.
Using Wolfram Mathematica, I found divisors from $n=0$ to $1000000$ and eliminated repeated divisors. Here is the list
$$left1,2,5,10,13,17,25,26,29,34,37,41,50,53,58,61,65,73,74,82,85,89,97,101,106,109,113,122,125,130,137,145,146,149,157,169,170,173,178,181,185,193,194,197,202,205,218,221,226,229,233,241,250,257,265,269,274,277,281..... right$$
After looking at the list extensively my guess is the density is zero.
Is there a mathematical way of finding this without computer programming?
divisibility
$endgroup$
We want to find the numbers that divide natural numbers in the form of $n^2+1$ and solve for their natural density.
Using Wolfram Mathematica, I found divisors from $n=0$ to $1000000$ and eliminated repeated divisors. Here is the list
$$left1,2,5,10,13,17,25,26,29,34,37,41,50,53,58,61,65,73,74,82,85,89,97,101,106,109,113,122,125,130,137,145,146,149,157,169,170,173,178,181,185,193,194,197,202,205,218,221,226,229,233,241,250,257,265,269,274,277,281..... right$$
After looking at the list extensively my guess is the density is zero.
Is there a mathematical way of finding this without computer programming?
divisibility
divisibility
edited Mar 29 at 17:48
Arbuja
asked Mar 26 at 12:16
ArbujaArbuja
883831
883831
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– Aloizio Macedo♦
Mar 28 at 12:44
$begingroup$
@AloizioMacedo Why is my question still unclear?
$endgroup$
– Arbuja
Mar 28 at 21:15
1
$begingroup$
The divisors of $n^2+1$ are precisely the numbers not divisible by four and with no prime factor one less than a multiple of four. These are tabulated at oeis.org/A008784 and there are links there which may lead to an answer to your question.
$endgroup$
– Gerry Myerson
Mar 29 at 1:52
$begingroup$
Related: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1472923/prime-divisors-of-x2-1 and math.stackexchange.com/questions/926561/…
$endgroup$
– Gerry Myerson
Mar 29 at 1:57
3
$begingroup$
I would suggest eliminating your initial general question, which is hopelessly broad. The specific question about numbers of the form $n^2+1$ is a perfectly good question though.
$endgroup$
– Eric Wofsey
Mar 29 at 3:52
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– Aloizio Macedo♦
Mar 28 at 12:44
$begingroup$
@AloizioMacedo Why is my question still unclear?
$endgroup$
– Arbuja
Mar 28 at 21:15
1
$begingroup$
The divisors of $n^2+1$ are precisely the numbers not divisible by four and with no prime factor one less than a multiple of four. These are tabulated at oeis.org/A008784 and there are links there which may lead to an answer to your question.
$endgroup$
– Gerry Myerson
Mar 29 at 1:52
$begingroup$
Related: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1472923/prime-divisors-of-x2-1 and math.stackexchange.com/questions/926561/…
$endgroup$
– Gerry Myerson
Mar 29 at 1:57
3
$begingroup$
I would suggest eliminating your initial general question, which is hopelessly broad. The specific question about numbers of the form $n^2+1$ is a perfectly good question though.
$endgroup$
– Eric Wofsey
Mar 29 at 3:52
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– Aloizio Macedo♦
Mar 28 at 12:44
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– Aloizio Macedo♦
Mar 28 at 12:44
$begingroup$
@AloizioMacedo Why is my question still unclear?
$endgroup$
– Arbuja
Mar 28 at 21:15
$begingroup$
@AloizioMacedo Why is my question still unclear?
$endgroup$
– Arbuja
Mar 28 at 21:15
1
1
$begingroup$
The divisors of $n^2+1$ are precisely the numbers not divisible by four and with no prime factor one less than a multiple of four. These are tabulated at oeis.org/A008784 and there are links there which may lead to an answer to your question.
$endgroup$
– Gerry Myerson
Mar 29 at 1:52
$begingroup$
The divisors of $n^2+1$ are precisely the numbers not divisible by four and with no prime factor one less than a multiple of four. These are tabulated at oeis.org/A008784 and there are links there which may lead to an answer to your question.
$endgroup$
– Gerry Myerson
Mar 29 at 1:52
$begingroup$
Related: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1472923/prime-divisors-of-x2-1 and math.stackexchange.com/questions/926561/…
$endgroup$
– Gerry Myerson
Mar 29 at 1:57
$begingroup$
Related: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1472923/prime-divisors-of-x2-1 and math.stackexchange.com/questions/926561/…
$endgroup$
– Gerry Myerson
Mar 29 at 1:57
3
3
$begingroup$
I would suggest eliminating your initial general question, which is hopelessly broad. The specific question about numbers of the form $n^2+1$ is a perfectly good question though.
$endgroup$
– Eric Wofsey
Mar 29 at 3:52
$begingroup$
I would suggest eliminating your initial general question, which is hopelessly broad. The specific question about numbers of the form $n^2+1$ is a perfectly good question though.
$endgroup$
– Eric Wofsey
Mar 29 at 3:52
|
show 3 more comments
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The set in question, call it $A$, is a proper subset of the set, call it $B$, of numbers which can be written as a sum of two squares (the difference between the two sets is that $B$ is the set of all numbers of the form $2^rPQ^2$ where $r$ is a nonnegative integer, the prime factors of $P$ are all $1bmod4$, and the prime factors of $Q$ are all $3bmod4$; $A$ is the same, but with $rle1$ and $Q=1$).
$B$ has density zero (and so, a fortiori, $A$ has density zero). This is discussed at https://mathoverflow.net/questions/205862/sums-of-two-squares-positive-lower-density and at the links to be found there. It goes back to Landau.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
As I understand it, you claim that every divisor of a number of the form $n^2+1$ belongs to one of some set of residue classes (mod 72).
This appears to be true. For instance if any multiple of 3 were to divide $n^2+1$ then we would have $n^2+1 equiv 0 pmod3$ and in turn $n^2 equiv -1 pmod3$. But -1 is not a quadratic residue (mod 3), so we can rule out classes like 72m, 72m+3, etc. as potential divisors of $n^2+1$.
I didn't verify your list, but clearly some such list exists.
If you wanted to go from here to calculating the asymptotic density, you'd need to prove something stronger, say that every (perhaps sufficiently large) number belonging to such a class divides some number of the form $n^2+1$.
UPDATE
In fact let's consider that question. Say you have some number $72m + r$ and claim it divides a number of the form $n^2 + 1$. That is, for some k we have $(72m + r)k = n^2 + 1$. Then $-1 + (72m+r)k$ is a perfect square for some $k>0$. But this is the same as $-1$ being a quadratic residue $pmod72m+r$.
My elementary number theory is rusty, but I think that's equivalent to every odd prime divisor of $72m+r$ being of the form $1 pmod4$. So you could try and see whether this applies to all numbers in such a class.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
It is a valiant effort to make sense of the Question, but the considerations you give do not help in determining "density". Showing that certain residues mod $72$ are possible as divisors of numbers of the form $n^2+1$ does not by itself guarantee all such residues as asymptotically equally likely. I applaud your effort to reason on this, but I'm voting to close the Question as the OP has twice asked pretty much the same ill-defined problem.
$endgroup$
– hardmath
Mar 26 at 18:35
$begingroup$
@hardmath lulu in the discussion, understands my question. What is still unclear?
$endgroup$
– Arbuja
Mar 28 at 22:44
1
$begingroup$
@Arbuja: With more recent edits to your Question, I'm now able to upvote both it and Daniel's Answer.
$endgroup$
– hardmath
Mar 30 at 0:31
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3163100%2fdescribe-the-natural-density-of-p-which-divides-natural-numbers-of-the-form-n%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The set in question, call it $A$, is a proper subset of the set, call it $B$, of numbers which can be written as a sum of two squares (the difference between the two sets is that $B$ is the set of all numbers of the form $2^rPQ^2$ where $r$ is a nonnegative integer, the prime factors of $P$ are all $1bmod4$, and the prime factors of $Q$ are all $3bmod4$; $A$ is the same, but with $rle1$ and $Q=1$).
$B$ has density zero (and so, a fortiori, $A$ has density zero). This is discussed at https://mathoverflow.net/questions/205862/sums-of-two-squares-positive-lower-density and at the links to be found there. It goes back to Landau.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The set in question, call it $A$, is a proper subset of the set, call it $B$, of numbers which can be written as a sum of two squares (the difference between the two sets is that $B$ is the set of all numbers of the form $2^rPQ^2$ where $r$ is a nonnegative integer, the prime factors of $P$ are all $1bmod4$, and the prime factors of $Q$ are all $3bmod4$; $A$ is the same, but with $rle1$ and $Q=1$).
$B$ has density zero (and so, a fortiori, $A$ has density zero). This is discussed at https://mathoverflow.net/questions/205862/sums-of-two-squares-positive-lower-density and at the links to be found there. It goes back to Landau.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The set in question, call it $A$, is a proper subset of the set, call it $B$, of numbers which can be written as a sum of two squares (the difference between the two sets is that $B$ is the set of all numbers of the form $2^rPQ^2$ where $r$ is a nonnegative integer, the prime factors of $P$ are all $1bmod4$, and the prime factors of $Q$ are all $3bmod4$; $A$ is the same, but with $rle1$ and $Q=1$).
$B$ has density zero (and so, a fortiori, $A$ has density zero). This is discussed at https://mathoverflow.net/questions/205862/sums-of-two-squares-positive-lower-density and at the links to be found there. It goes back to Landau.
$endgroup$
The set in question, call it $A$, is a proper subset of the set, call it $B$, of numbers which can be written as a sum of two squares (the difference between the two sets is that $B$ is the set of all numbers of the form $2^rPQ^2$ where $r$ is a nonnegative integer, the prime factors of $P$ are all $1bmod4$, and the prime factors of $Q$ are all $3bmod4$; $A$ is the same, but with $rle1$ and $Q=1$).
$B$ has density zero (and so, a fortiori, $A$ has density zero). This is discussed at https://mathoverflow.net/questions/205862/sums-of-two-squares-positive-lower-density and at the links to be found there. It goes back to Landau.
edited Mar 30 at 3:25
answered Mar 29 at 23:14
Gerry MyersonGerry Myerson
148k8152306
148k8152306
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
As I understand it, you claim that every divisor of a number of the form $n^2+1$ belongs to one of some set of residue classes (mod 72).
This appears to be true. For instance if any multiple of 3 were to divide $n^2+1$ then we would have $n^2+1 equiv 0 pmod3$ and in turn $n^2 equiv -1 pmod3$. But -1 is not a quadratic residue (mod 3), so we can rule out classes like 72m, 72m+3, etc. as potential divisors of $n^2+1$.
I didn't verify your list, but clearly some such list exists.
If you wanted to go from here to calculating the asymptotic density, you'd need to prove something stronger, say that every (perhaps sufficiently large) number belonging to such a class divides some number of the form $n^2+1$.
UPDATE
In fact let's consider that question. Say you have some number $72m + r$ and claim it divides a number of the form $n^2 + 1$. That is, for some k we have $(72m + r)k = n^2 + 1$. Then $-1 + (72m+r)k$ is a perfect square for some $k>0$. But this is the same as $-1$ being a quadratic residue $pmod72m+r$.
My elementary number theory is rusty, but I think that's equivalent to every odd prime divisor of $72m+r$ being of the form $1 pmod4$. So you could try and see whether this applies to all numbers in such a class.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
It is a valiant effort to make sense of the Question, but the considerations you give do not help in determining "density". Showing that certain residues mod $72$ are possible as divisors of numbers of the form $n^2+1$ does not by itself guarantee all such residues as asymptotically equally likely. I applaud your effort to reason on this, but I'm voting to close the Question as the OP has twice asked pretty much the same ill-defined problem.
$endgroup$
– hardmath
Mar 26 at 18:35
$begingroup$
@hardmath lulu in the discussion, understands my question. What is still unclear?
$endgroup$
– Arbuja
Mar 28 at 22:44
1
$begingroup$
@Arbuja: With more recent edits to your Question, I'm now able to upvote both it and Daniel's Answer.
$endgroup$
– hardmath
Mar 30 at 0:31
add a comment |
$begingroup$
As I understand it, you claim that every divisor of a number of the form $n^2+1$ belongs to one of some set of residue classes (mod 72).
This appears to be true. For instance if any multiple of 3 were to divide $n^2+1$ then we would have $n^2+1 equiv 0 pmod3$ and in turn $n^2 equiv -1 pmod3$. But -1 is not a quadratic residue (mod 3), so we can rule out classes like 72m, 72m+3, etc. as potential divisors of $n^2+1$.
I didn't verify your list, but clearly some such list exists.
If you wanted to go from here to calculating the asymptotic density, you'd need to prove something stronger, say that every (perhaps sufficiently large) number belonging to such a class divides some number of the form $n^2+1$.
UPDATE
In fact let's consider that question. Say you have some number $72m + r$ and claim it divides a number of the form $n^2 + 1$. That is, for some k we have $(72m + r)k = n^2 + 1$. Then $-1 + (72m+r)k$ is a perfect square for some $k>0$. But this is the same as $-1$ being a quadratic residue $pmod72m+r$.
My elementary number theory is rusty, but I think that's equivalent to every odd prime divisor of $72m+r$ being of the form $1 pmod4$. So you could try and see whether this applies to all numbers in such a class.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
It is a valiant effort to make sense of the Question, but the considerations you give do not help in determining "density". Showing that certain residues mod $72$ are possible as divisors of numbers of the form $n^2+1$ does not by itself guarantee all such residues as asymptotically equally likely. I applaud your effort to reason on this, but I'm voting to close the Question as the OP has twice asked pretty much the same ill-defined problem.
$endgroup$
– hardmath
Mar 26 at 18:35
$begingroup$
@hardmath lulu in the discussion, understands my question. What is still unclear?
$endgroup$
– Arbuja
Mar 28 at 22:44
1
$begingroup$
@Arbuja: With more recent edits to your Question, I'm now able to upvote both it and Daniel's Answer.
$endgroup$
– hardmath
Mar 30 at 0:31
add a comment |
$begingroup$
As I understand it, you claim that every divisor of a number of the form $n^2+1$ belongs to one of some set of residue classes (mod 72).
This appears to be true. For instance if any multiple of 3 were to divide $n^2+1$ then we would have $n^2+1 equiv 0 pmod3$ and in turn $n^2 equiv -1 pmod3$. But -1 is not a quadratic residue (mod 3), so we can rule out classes like 72m, 72m+3, etc. as potential divisors of $n^2+1$.
I didn't verify your list, but clearly some such list exists.
If you wanted to go from here to calculating the asymptotic density, you'd need to prove something stronger, say that every (perhaps sufficiently large) number belonging to such a class divides some number of the form $n^2+1$.
UPDATE
In fact let's consider that question. Say you have some number $72m + r$ and claim it divides a number of the form $n^2 + 1$. That is, for some k we have $(72m + r)k = n^2 + 1$. Then $-1 + (72m+r)k$ is a perfect square for some $k>0$. But this is the same as $-1$ being a quadratic residue $pmod72m+r$.
My elementary number theory is rusty, but I think that's equivalent to every odd prime divisor of $72m+r$ being of the form $1 pmod4$. So you could try and see whether this applies to all numbers in such a class.
$endgroup$
As I understand it, you claim that every divisor of a number of the form $n^2+1$ belongs to one of some set of residue classes (mod 72).
This appears to be true. For instance if any multiple of 3 were to divide $n^2+1$ then we would have $n^2+1 equiv 0 pmod3$ and in turn $n^2 equiv -1 pmod3$. But -1 is not a quadratic residue (mod 3), so we can rule out classes like 72m, 72m+3, etc. as potential divisors of $n^2+1$.
I didn't verify your list, but clearly some such list exists.
If you wanted to go from here to calculating the asymptotic density, you'd need to prove something stronger, say that every (perhaps sufficiently large) number belonging to such a class divides some number of the form $n^2+1$.
UPDATE
In fact let's consider that question. Say you have some number $72m + r$ and claim it divides a number of the form $n^2 + 1$. That is, for some k we have $(72m + r)k = n^2 + 1$. Then $-1 + (72m+r)k$ is a perfect square for some $k>0$. But this is the same as $-1$ being a quadratic residue $pmod72m+r$.
My elementary number theory is rusty, but I think that's equivalent to every odd prime divisor of $72m+r$ being of the form $1 pmod4$. So you could try and see whether this applies to all numbers in such a class.
edited Mar 26 at 13:45
answered Mar 26 at 13:01
Daniel McLauryDaniel McLaury
16.1k33081
16.1k33081
1
$begingroup$
It is a valiant effort to make sense of the Question, but the considerations you give do not help in determining "density". Showing that certain residues mod $72$ are possible as divisors of numbers of the form $n^2+1$ does not by itself guarantee all such residues as asymptotically equally likely. I applaud your effort to reason on this, but I'm voting to close the Question as the OP has twice asked pretty much the same ill-defined problem.
$endgroup$
– hardmath
Mar 26 at 18:35
$begingroup$
@hardmath lulu in the discussion, understands my question. What is still unclear?
$endgroup$
– Arbuja
Mar 28 at 22:44
1
$begingroup$
@Arbuja: With more recent edits to your Question, I'm now able to upvote both it and Daniel's Answer.
$endgroup$
– hardmath
Mar 30 at 0:31
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
It is a valiant effort to make sense of the Question, but the considerations you give do not help in determining "density". Showing that certain residues mod $72$ are possible as divisors of numbers of the form $n^2+1$ does not by itself guarantee all such residues as asymptotically equally likely. I applaud your effort to reason on this, but I'm voting to close the Question as the OP has twice asked pretty much the same ill-defined problem.
$endgroup$
– hardmath
Mar 26 at 18:35
$begingroup$
@hardmath lulu in the discussion, understands my question. What is still unclear?
$endgroup$
– Arbuja
Mar 28 at 22:44
1
$begingroup$
@Arbuja: With more recent edits to your Question, I'm now able to upvote both it and Daniel's Answer.
$endgroup$
– hardmath
Mar 30 at 0:31
1
1
$begingroup$
It is a valiant effort to make sense of the Question, but the considerations you give do not help in determining "density". Showing that certain residues mod $72$ are possible as divisors of numbers of the form $n^2+1$ does not by itself guarantee all such residues as asymptotically equally likely. I applaud your effort to reason on this, but I'm voting to close the Question as the OP has twice asked pretty much the same ill-defined problem.
$endgroup$
– hardmath
Mar 26 at 18:35
$begingroup$
It is a valiant effort to make sense of the Question, but the considerations you give do not help in determining "density". Showing that certain residues mod $72$ are possible as divisors of numbers of the form $n^2+1$ does not by itself guarantee all such residues as asymptotically equally likely. I applaud your effort to reason on this, but I'm voting to close the Question as the OP has twice asked pretty much the same ill-defined problem.
$endgroup$
– hardmath
Mar 26 at 18:35
$begingroup$
@hardmath lulu in the discussion, understands my question. What is still unclear?
$endgroup$
– Arbuja
Mar 28 at 22:44
$begingroup$
@hardmath lulu in the discussion, understands my question. What is still unclear?
$endgroup$
– Arbuja
Mar 28 at 22:44
1
1
$begingroup$
@Arbuja: With more recent edits to your Question, I'm now able to upvote both it and Daniel's Answer.
$endgroup$
– hardmath
Mar 30 at 0:31
$begingroup$
@Arbuja: With more recent edits to your Question, I'm now able to upvote both it and Daniel's Answer.
$endgroup$
– hardmath
Mar 30 at 0:31
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3163100%2fdescribe-the-natural-density-of-p-which-divides-natural-numbers-of-the-form-n%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– Aloizio Macedo♦
Mar 28 at 12:44
$begingroup$
@AloizioMacedo Why is my question still unclear?
$endgroup$
– Arbuja
Mar 28 at 21:15
1
$begingroup$
The divisors of $n^2+1$ are precisely the numbers not divisible by four and with no prime factor one less than a multiple of four. These are tabulated at oeis.org/A008784 and there are links there which may lead to an answer to your question.
$endgroup$
– Gerry Myerson
Mar 29 at 1:52
$begingroup$
Related: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1472923/prime-divisors-of-x2-1 and math.stackexchange.com/questions/926561/…
$endgroup$
– Gerry Myerson
Mar 29 at 1:57
3
$begingroup$
I would suggest eliminating your initial general question, which is hopelessly broad. The specific question about numbers of the form $n^2+1$ is a perfectly good question though.
$endgroup$
– Eric Wofsey
Mar 29 at 3:52