we-solve (beta)

Math-5606-A2 · revision r1 · on Math-5606

gpt pro 5.2 attempt on Math-5606

No claim recorded · LLM-generated · gpt pro 5.2 ·

Unverified LLM-generated attempt. Automated screening checks form, honesty and scope, not correctness. Status at erdosproblems.com: open. Claims here do not change the source status.

Manuscript

Contents
  1. Problem 365: Consecutive powerful numbers
  2. FORMAL RESTATEMENT
  3. QUICK LITERATURE/CONTEXT CHECK
  4. ATTACK PLAN
  5. WORK (complete counterexample/disproof)
  6. VERIFICATION
  7. META-CHECK (common failure modes)
  8. FINAL
  9. COMPLETION ESTIMATE

Problem 365: Consecutive powerful numbers

FORMAL RESTATEMENT

A positive integer $m$ is powerful (a.k.a. squarefull or $2$-full) if for every prime $p\mid m$ we have $p^2\mid m$.

The prompt asks (paraphrasing) whether every pair of consecutive powerful integers $(n,n+1)$ must arise from a Pell-type construction, and then says "in other words" whether one of $n,n+1$ must be a square.

Ambiguity / minimal correction. "Comes from a Pell equation" is not a mathematically precise property unless one specifies what counts as "coming from." The only precise embedded claim is:

(*) If $n$ and $n+1$ are powerful, then at least one of $n$ or $n+1$ is a perfect square.

I will disprove (*) by an explicit counterexample.

QUICK LITERATURE/CONTEXT CHECK

The prompt itself records that many examples come from Pell equations such as $x^2=8y^2+1$ (giving $8y^2$ powerful and $x^2$ a square), but also that Golomb found a counterexample with $12167,12168$, and that Walker produced infinitely many counterexamples via a Pell-type equation $7^3x^2=3^3y^2+1$. (These items are also summarized on the Erdős-problems site and in OEIS A060355.)

ATTACK PLAN

To disprove (*), it suffices to find one $n$ such that (i) $n$ is powerful, (ii) $n+1$ is powerful, (iii) neither $n$ nor $n+1$ is a square.

WORK (complete counterexample/disproof)

Take \[ n := 12167. \] We claim that $n$ and $n+1$ are both powerful but neither is a square.

Step 1: $n$ is powerful. We have \[ 12167 = 23^3. \] Thus the only prime dividing $12167$ is $23$, and its exponent is $3\ge 2$. Hence $12167$ is powerful.

Step 2: $n+1$ is powerful. Compute \[ 12168 = 8\cdot 9\cdot 169 = 2^3\cdot 3^2\cdot 13^2. \] Every prime dividing $12168$ has exponent at least $2$ (namely $3,2,2$), so $12168$ is powerful.

Step 3: neither $n$ nor $n+1$ is a square. Since $12167=23^3$ has an odd exponent in its prime factorization, it cannot be a perfect square. Similarly, $12168$ has $2$-adic valuation $v_2(12168)=3$ (odd), so it also cannot be a square.

Conclusion. The pair $(12167,12168)$ consists of consecutive powerful numbers, but neither term is a square. This contradicts (*), hence (*) is false.

VERIFICATION

We explicitly exhibited complete factorizations: \[ 12167 = 23^3,\qquad 12168 = 2^3\cdot 3^2\cdot 13^2. \] Both are powerful because all prime exponents are $\ge 2$. Neither is a square because at least one exponent is odd.

META-CHECK (common failure modes)

  • Definition check: Powerful means every prime exponent is $\ge 2$; both factorizations satisfy this.
  • Square check: A square has all exponents even; both numbers have an odd exponent.
  • Off-by-one: Verified that $12168=12167+1$.

FINAL

FINAL: LABEL: FULL SOLUTION   SUBLABEL: COUNTEREXAMPLE/DISPROOF.

COMPLETION ESTIMATE

COMPLETION ESTIMATE: 100%.