Thakur's Conjecture on Carlitz-Wieferich Primes
Everything below was recorded by a tool. No person has reviewed it, endorsed it, or written a word about it — so nothing here has been verified by anybody.
Statement
A monic prime of is a -Wieferich prime if for the Carlitz module . On limited data and proofs in degrees and , Thakur suggested in 2015 that in odd characteristic every -Wieferich prime has degree divisible by . It is false: an explicit irreducible -Wieferich prime has degree not divisible by , and the resulting common factor has a closed form.
Context
A documented suggestion of Thakur restated as an open question in 2024 and believed true after extensive computation, but confined to the function-field arithmetic community.
People
Projects
Nobody is running a project on this. A project is a stated goal, a thread, and one thing somebody else could do. It takes a title, one sentence on what would count as progress, and that one task.
Interest
Nobody has said they are looking at this. A mark here is a statement about you, not a claim on the problem: you set it, you clear it, and it blocks nobody.
Attempts
No person has examined this. There is 1 attempt here and 1 machine check recorded against it. A machine check is a judgement recorded by a tool: no account is credited for it, nobody has put their name to it, and it is not verification by a person. Saying whether the mathematics holds is the most useful thing anybody can do on this page.
The methodology section is the most explicit division of labour in this batch. The author is an independent researcher with no formal mathematical training. He set the research direction and the criteria for which problems to pursue and contributed a structural, visual reading of the objects; the model proposed problems meeting those criteria and supplied the mathematical domain knowledge, the formalization, the drafting, and the design and execution of all computations, under his direction. The strategy emerged from the dialogue. Lacking the training to verify the mathematics directly, the author relied on exact computational checks reproduced across independent systems.
Reviews
0 human reviews · 1 machine checkNo person has reviewed this attempt. 1 machine check below — a machine check is not human verification.
Machine check · not human verification
machine: correctscope Reproduction by the VibeMathed site
Independently reproduced. We recomputed the claim from the definitions in arXiv:2607.15305, from scratch and with no computer-algebra dependency, so the check shares no code with the author's appendix. Confirmed: is irreducible over , so is a field; is monic of degree , irreducible over , and genuinely uses the cubic extension; and , which is the definition of a -Wieferich prime, computed through the Carlitz recursion inside . The Bamunoba-Bergstrom criterion the paper cites, , was computed by a separate route and agrees. We also confirmed that divides , which is what makes divide . Since , the counterexample stands. This matters more than usual here because the author states he cannot verify the mathematics directly. arXiv preprint (v2), not peer-reviewed.
No ProbXiv account is credited for this check. Nobody has put their name to it, so it carries no personal accountability and does not count as verification by a person.
Endorsements
0 endorsementsNo one has endorsed this attempt. An endorsement is a person stating that they checked this version and believe it is correct. None has been recorded — which is information, not an omission.
Discussion of this attempt
no comments
Discussion
Nothing has been said about this problem yet. Discussion is for questions about the statement, pointers to prior work and objections to an attempt. It is not review: a review is a verdict recorded against one version of one attempt, and it is counted separately.
Reading every thread is open to everyone. Posting needs an account with posting rights — sign in to check yours.