 
 
 
 
 
   
 , and recall from above that
, and recall from above that 
 , so
, so  is definitely composite,
is definitely composite, 
 .  Next,
.  Next,  is
 is 
 .
So, finally,
.
So, finally, 
 .
.  
Now suppose  is any positive number.   
Then, just as above,
 is any positive number.   
Then, just as above,  can be written as a product of primes:
 can be written as a product of primes:
 is prime, we are done.
 is prime, we are done.
 is composite, then
 is composite, then  with
 with  . By induction,
. By induction,
 are products of primes, so
 are products of primes, so  is also a product of primes.
 is also a product of primes.
What if we had done something differently when breaking  apart
as a product of primes?  Could the primes that show up be different?
Why not just try?  We have
 apart
as a product of primes?  Could the primes that show up be different?
Why not just try?  We have 
 .  Now
.  Now 
 and
 and
 , so everything turned out the same.  Will it always?
, so everything turned out the same.  Will it always?
Incidently, there's an open problem nearby:
Unsolved Question:  Is there an algorithm which can factor any
given integer  so quickly that its ``running time'' is bounded by
a polynomial function of the number of decimal digits of
 so quickly that its ``running time'' is bounded by
a polynomial function of the number of decimal digits of  .
.
I think most people would guess ``no'', but nobody has yet proved that it can't be done (and told everyone...). If there were such an algorithm, then the cryptosystem that I use to send my girlfriend private emails would probably be easily broken.
 
 
 
 
