Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Statement
Setting (p. 1). A prime is a socialist prime (Trudgian's term, which the paper adopts) when the residues of modulo are all distinct. Kurepa's left factorial is .
Let be a socialist prime, and let be the one nonzero residue modulo that is not among (there are distinct values among nonzero residues). The paper derives in Section 2 (pp. 2--3):
- (2.4) (p. 2). and .
- (2.5) (p. 2). , and consequently is odd, so .
- (2.6) (p. 2). , and hence the necessary condition
The value of the missing residue and were already proved by Rokowska and Schinzel (1960), as the paper recalls on p. 1 with (1.1); the paper rederives them here. Condition (2.6), linking socialist primes to Kurepa's left factorial, is the paper's new condition.
Proof pointer
P. 2. Wilson's theorem gives and , and the reflection for gives . Distinctness forbids , which forces $p\equiv1\pmod 4$ and (2.4). Writing as times the product of all , , and pairing factorials by the reflection, gives ; since differs from , (2.5) follows. Finally the residues together with run over , whose sum is mod ; this gives , and (2.4) turns it into (2.6).
Read depth
Claims checked: the definitions and (2.1)--(2.6) were read clause by clause on the arXiv v1 print, pp. 1--2, and the derivation on p. 2 was followed. Nothing here is independently reviewed.
Dependencies
None in the corpus. External input: Wilson's theorem.
Source. V. Andrejić and M. Tatarevic, On distinct residues of factorials, arXiv:1603.04086v1 (2016); published in Publ. Inst. Math. (Beograd) (N.S.) 100(114) (2016), 101--106. Labels and pages here are those of the arXiv v1 print; the edition read is named on the source card.
Bears on
- Problem 478: for one has , so the problem's has at most elements, with equality exactly when the residues of are distinct: at , and for exactly when is a socialist prime (an observation of this page, not of the paper). The conditions here constrain only that extreme case; they say nothing about the size of in general or about the asymptotic the problem asks for.