A Mersenne number is a number of the form 2^{k} âˆ’ 1. A Mersenne prime is a Mersenne number which is also a prime.

It turns out that if 2^{k} âˆ’ 1 is prime then *k* must be prime, so Mersenne numbers have the form 2^{p} âˆ’ 1 is prime. What about the converse? If *p* is prime, is 2^{k} âˆ’ 1 also prime? No, because, for example, 2^{11} âˆ’Â 1 = 1023 = 3 Ã— 11 Ã— 31.

If *p* is not just a prime but a Mersenne prime, then is 2^{p} âˆ’ 1 a prime? Sometimes, but not always. The first counterexample is *p* = 8191.

There is an interesting chain of iterated Mersenne primes:

This raises the question of whether *m* = 2^{M12} âˆ’ 1 is prime. Direct testing using available methods is completely out of the question. The only way weâ€™ll ever know is if there is some theoretical result that settles the question.

Hereâ€™s an easier question. Suppose *m* is prime. Where would it fall on the list of Mersenne primes if conjectures about the distribution of Mersenne primes are true?

This post reports

It has been conjectured that as

xincreases, the number of primespâ‰¤xsuch that 2^{p}â€“ 1 is also prime is asymptotically

e^{Î³}logx/ log 2where Î³ is the Euler-Mascheroni constant.

If that conjecture is true, the number of primes less than *M*_{12} that are the exponents of Mersenne primes would be approximately

*e*^{Î³} logÂ *M*_{12} / log 2 = 226.2.

So if *m* is a Mersenne prime, it may be the 226th Mersenne prime, or *M*_{n} for some *n* around 226, if the conjectured distribution of Mersenne primes is correct.

Weâ€™ve discovered a dozen Mersenne primes since the turn of the century and weâ€™re up to 51 discovered so far. Weâ€™re probably not going to get up to the 226th Mersenne prime, if there even is a 226th Mersenne prime, any time soon.

Â