Ivan Shishkin, Rye (1878)

Discussions

No linear recurrence for the primes

0 messages

Solution

Solution by visitor · EN

Following Phil Caldero

Theorem. Let K\mathbb K be a field of characteristic zero. The sequence (pn)n1(p_n)_{n\ge 1} of prime numbers satisfies no relation
a0pn+d=a1pn+d1++adpn(nn0)a_0\,p_{n+d}=a_1\,p_{n+d-1}+\dots+a_d\,p_n\qquad (n\ge n_0)with d1d\ge 1, a0,,adKa_0,\dots,a_d\in\mathbb K and a00a_0\neq 0.

Lemma 1 (descent). If a sequence with values in a subfield FKF\subset\mathbb K satisfies such a relation with coefficients in K\mathbb K, it satisfies one of the same order with coefficients in FF.

Proof. Put rn=(pn+d1,,pn)Fdr_n=(p_{n+d-1},\dots,p_n)\in F^d and bn=pn+db_n=p_{n+d}. By assumption there is aKda\in\mathbb K^d with rna=bnr_n\cdot a=b_n for nn0n\ge n_0. Choose rn1,,rnkr_{n_1},\dots,r_{n_k} a basis of the subspace of FdF^d spanned by the rnr_n. The finite system rnjX=bnjr_{n_j}\cdot X=b_{n_j} has coefficients in FF and a solution in Kd\mathbb K^d; since rank is unchanged by field extension, it has a solution aFda'\in F^d. If rn=jcjrnjr_n=\sum_j c_j r_{n_j} with cjFc_j\in F, then rna=jcjbnj=jcj(rnja)=rna=bnr_n\cdot a'=\sum_j c_j b_{n_j}=\sum_j c_j\,(r_{n_j}\cdot a)=r_n\cdot a=b_n. \square

Lemma 2 (periodicity modulo qq). Let (un)(u_n) be a sequence of integers and a0,,adZa_0,\dots,a_d\in\mathbb Z with a0ad0a_0a_d\ne 0 such that a0un+d=i=1daiun+dia_0u_{n+d}=\sum_{i=1}^d a_iu_{n+d-i} for nn0n\ge n_0. For every prime qq not dividing a0ada_0a_d, there is T1T\ge 1 such that un+Tun(modq)u_{n+T}\equiv u_n \pmod q for all nn0n\ge n_0.

Proof. Modulo qq, a0a_0 is invertible and the vector vn=(un,,un+d1)Fqdv_n=(u_n,\dots,u_{n+d-1})\in\mathbb F_q^d satisfies vn+1=Avnv_{n+1}=Av_n, where AA is the companion matrix with entries aˉi=aia01\bar a_i=a_ia_0^{-1}. Since detA=±aˉd0\det A=\pm\bar a_d\neq 0, AA lies in the finite group GLd(Fq)\mathrm{GL}_d(\mathbb F_q), so AT=IA^T=I for T=GLd(Fq)T=|\mathrm{GL}_d(\mathbb F_q)|, and vn+T=vnv_{n+T}=v_n for nn0n\ge n_0. \square

Proof of the theorem. Suppose not, and take a relation of minimal order d1d\ge 1, valid for nn0n\ge n_0. Since QK\mathbb Q\subset\mathbb K and pnQp_n\in\mathbb Q, Lemma 1 lets us assume the aia_i are rational, then integers after clearing denominators. We have ad0a_d\neq 0: otherwise the relation, shifted by one index, would have order d1d-1. The integer a0ada_0a_d has only finitely many prime divisors, so there is kn0k\ge n_0 such that q=pkq=p_k does not divide a0ada_0a_d. By Lemma 2, pk+Tpk=q0(modq)p_{k+T}\equiv p_k=q\equiv 0\pmod q. Thus qq divides the prime pk+Tp_{k+T}, hence pk+T=q=pkp_{k+T}=q=p_k, contradicting the strict monotonicity of (pn)(p_n). \square

Remarks. The proof uses only two properties of (pn)(p_n): every term is prime, and terms with distinct indices are distinct. It therefore applies to any injective sequence of primes. The characteristic-zero assumption is necessary: over F2\mathbb F_2, the sequence (0,1,1,1,)(0,1,1,1,\dots) satisfies un+2=un+1u_{n+2}=u_{n+1}.

No messages yet.