Alphabeta Math
False statementConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passverified 2026-08-03 (gpt-5.6-sol-codex-subscription)
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

FALSE: n2+n+41 is prime for every natural number n

Statement

False claim: for every n∈N the integer

ι(n)2+ι(n)+41

is prime (Prime and composite integers: p is prime when p>1 and its only positive divisors are 1 and p), where ι:N→Z is the embedding of The naturals embed in the integers and the square is the natural power of Powers gn: natural exponents in a monoid and integer exponents in a group, with g0=e in the commutative monoid (Z,⋅,1) of (Z,⋅,1) is a commutative monoid whose group of units is {1,−1}; equivalently u∣1 holds exactly for u=1 and u=−1. As usual a numeral k inside Z means ι(k).

Witness: n=40. Here

402+40+41  =  1600+40+41  =  1681  =  41⋅41,

so 1681 has the positive divisor 41, which is neither 1 nor 1681: it is composite, not prime.

The failure is structural rather than accidental: 402+40=40⋅41, so the whole expression is 40⋅41+41=41⋅41.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The integers 40, 41 and 1681.

[L1]

p is prime when p>1 and its only positive divisors are 1 and p; an integer >1 that is not prime is composite (Prime and composite integers: p is prime when p>1 and its only positive divisors are 1 and p).

[L5]

Z is a commutative ring: multiplication is associative and commutative, x⋅1=x, and multiplication distributes over addition (The integers form a commutative ring, Arithmetic on the integers, The integers as equivalence classes of pairs of naturals).

[L6]

The order on Z is total, antisymmetric and transitive and is compatible with addition (The integers form a totally ordered ring, Order on the integers); ι is injective and order preserving with image the nonnegative integers, ι(0)=0, ι(1)=1 (The naturals embed in the integers, Discreteness: σ(n) is the immediate successor, The natural numbers N (von Neumann), Order on the natural numbers).

Refutation

technique · direct
1.1

0<1, since 1=ι(1) is nonnegative and differs from 0=ι(0) by injectivity of ι.

L6
1.2

At n=40 the expression equals 41⋅41. By [L2], 402=40⋅40, and distributivity gives 40⋅40+40=40⋅(40+1)=40⋅41; adding 41 and using distributivity again, 40⋅41+41=(40+1)⋅41=41⋅41.

L2L5
1.3

Arithmetically 40⋅40=1600, 1600+40=1640, 1640+41=1681, and 41⋅41=1681; so the value at n=40 is 1681.

L5algebra
2.1

41∣1681, since 1681=41⋅41; and 41>0.

step 1.2step 1.3L3
2.2

41≠1, because 41−1=40>0; and 41≠1681, because 1681−41=1640>0; and 1681>1.

step 1.1step 1.3L6algebra
3.1

So 1681 has a positive divisor other than 1 and itself, hence is not prime; being greater than 1 it is composite. The claim therefore fails at n=40.

step 2.1step 2.2L1∎

Remarks

  • Checking small cases proves nothing here, and that is the point of the item. The values at n=0,1,…,39 are classically known to be prime — this is Euler's polynomial, and the fact is not verified above, since it is not needed for a refutation. A claim that survives forty consecutive tests and fails at the forty-first is exactly the situation a universal statement has to be proved out of, not tested out of.

  • The witness is not isolated. n=41 fails for the same structural reason: 412+41+41=41⋅(41+1+1)=41⋅43=1763, again divisible by 41 and again neither 1 nor itself. What both cases exploit is that 41 divides the constant term, so it divides the whole value whenever it divides n2+n.

  • The refuted claim is about N, which contains 0. At n=0 the value is 41, so the claim is not vacuous at its first index; the witness is needed.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

55 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.

Sources