Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
For a nonzero integer and a prime , is the exponent of in , and is the number of distinct prime factors of .
Statement
Theorem 1.2 (printed p. 295). Let and be integers with . There is a number , effectively computable in terms of , with the following property: for every prime that does not divide and exceeds , and every integer ,
Immediately after the theorem the paper records the case : if are integers and is an odd prime not dividing with , then
The printed hypotheses of this consequence also include " is an integer with " (p. 295), although does not occur in its inequality.
The paper says the theorem follows from a special case of Lemma 4.3, the -adic estimate that yields a crucial step in the proof of Theorem 1.1. It then cites Yamada's estimate , with effectively computable in terms of , display (1.10) on p. 296.
Source and proof pointer
Cameron L. Stewart, On divisors of Lucas and Lehmer numbers, Acta Mathematica 211 (2013), 291--314, as identified on the source card. The theorem and (1.9) are on printed p. 295 (physical p. 5), with the case below them. The proof is Section 6, printed p. 311 (physical p. 21).
In the arXiv:1008.1274v1 manuscript the result is Theorem 2 with display (9), physical p. 4. There the remark that follows also states the intermediate inequality for odd and , before the case . The proof is Section 6, physical pp. 16--17.
In outline, the proof reduces to coprime , shows that for an odd prime the -adic order of is at most that of plus (the paper's (6.5)), and then applies Lemma 4.3 with exponent . The proof is not transcribed here.
Read depth. Claims checked: the statement, its hypotheses, constants, label and page were read clause by clause on the printed page. The proof was not checked line by line.
Bears on
- Problem 977: the theorem is not the result that settles the problem. It follows from a special case of Lemma 4.3, which yields a crucial step in the paper's proof of Theorem 1.1, whose specialization (1.8) with , gives .