Deprecated: $wgMWOAuthSharedUserIDs=false is deprecated, set $wgMWOAuthSharedUserIDs=true, $wgMWOAuthSharedUserSource='local' instead [Called from MediaWiki\HookContainer\HookContainer::run in /var/www/html/w/includes/HookContainer/HookContainer.php at line 135] in /var/www/html/w/includes/Debug/MWDebug.php on line 372
Powerful numbers in \((1^k +1)(2^k+1) \cdots (n^k +1)\) - MaRDI portal

Powerful numbers in \((1^k +1)(2^k+1) \cdots (n^k +1)\) (Q452395)

From MaRDI portal





scientific article; zbMATH DE number 6084785
Language Label Description Also known as
English
Powerful numbers in \((1^k +1)(2^k+1) \cdots (n^k +1)\)
scientific article; zbMATH DE number 6084785

    Statements

    Powerful numbers in \((1^k +1)(2^k+1) \cdots (n^k +1)\) (English)
    0 references
    21 September 2012
    0 references
    Define \(\Omega_k(n)=\prod_{a=1}^n (a^k+1)\). The authors show that if \(k\) is an odd prime, then \(\Omega_k(n)\) is not powerful. For the proof they show by elementary means that if \(p\in[n/2+1, n+1]\) is a prime, satisfying \(p\neq k\) and \(p\not\equiv 1\pmod{k}\), then \(p\mid\Omega_k(n)\), but \(p^2\nmid\Omega_k(n)\). In particular, if such a prime exists, then \(\Omega_k(n)\) is not powerful. They then combine an explicit version of the prime number theorem with the Brun-Titchmarsh inequality to show that for \(n>9\) such a prime always exists.
    0 references
    powerful number
    0 references
    explicit prime number theorem
    0 references
    shifted power
    0 references
    0 references
    0 references

    Identifiers