PRIMES OF THE FORM x2 + ny 2 AND THE GEOMETRY OF

(CONVENIENT) NUMBERS

THOMAS R. HAGEDORN

Fermat’s theorem that an odd prime p can be expressed as a sum x2 + y 2 precisely

when p ≡ 1 mod 4 is one of the highlights of a first course in number theory. Fermat
first stated this theorem in a 1640 letter to Mersenne, and over the next two decades,
he found similar statements for when a prime p could be written in the form x2 + ny 2
for n = 2, 3. Namely:
p = x2 + 2y 2 ⇐⇒ p = 2 or p ≡ 1, 3 mod 8,
p = x2 + 3y 2 ⇐⇒ p = 3 or p ≡ 1 mod 3.
The first rigorous proofs of these results were given by Euler using Fermat’s method
of descent. Euler also made similar conjectures for other values of n (see Cox [1]).
When n = 5, for primes p 6= 5, he conjectured:
p = x2 + 5y 2 ⇐⇒ p ≡ 1, 9 mod 20
(1)
2p = x2 + 5y 2 ⇐⇒ p ≡ 3, 7 mod 20.
A natural question is whether for any integer n, there are congruence conditions
that precisely describe the set of primes p such that p = x2 + ny 2 , for some x, y ∈ Z
(with a finite number of exceptions). We call n a convenient number,1 or numerus
idoneus in Latin, if there is a finite set S, an integer N , and congruence classes
c1 , . . . , ck mod N such that for all primes p 6∈ S,
(2) p = x2 + ny 2 ⇐⇒ p ≡ c1 , . . . , ck mod N.
Euler used convenient numbers to find large primes. When n is convenient, m is prime
precisely when there is exactly one solution to the equation x2 + ny 2 = m of relatively
prime positive integers (x, y). We will see that n = 1848 is convenient. Then since
x = 197, y = 100 is the only relatively prime solution to the equation
18, 518, 809 = x2 + 1848y 2 ,
Euler could prove with minimal calculation that 18, 518, 809 is prime.
Euler found the 65 convenient numbers listed in Table 1. He was astonished that
after n = 1848, he could not find another convenient number despite searching upto
10, 000. To quote Weil [6, p. 229], “that such a naturally defined set of numbers
should apparently be finite, as [Euler] now came to conjecture, was a novel experience
to him.” In his Disquisitiones, Gauss rigorously proved that they were convenient
numbers using his theory of positive definite quadratic forms. We now know due to

1This definition can be shown to be equivalent to the definitions of Euler and Gauss.
1
2 T. R. HAGEDORN

Weinberger [7] that there that there are at most 66 convenient numbers. The 66th
convenient number, if it exists, must be greater than 109 .
In this paper, we present an alternative proof that these 65 numbers are convenient
using Minkowski’s geometry of numbers. This proof uses quadratic reciprocity, but
doesn’t use Gauss’s theory of binary quadratic forms or genus theory, making it
suitable as a supplement at the end of a first course in number theory. When n =
1, this application is well-known, giving Fermat’s theorem on p = x2 + y 2 , and is
often presented as the first application of Minkowski’s theory. For other values of
n, however, we have not seen this application documented in the literature. As an
example, for n = 93, we can easily show:
Proposition 1. For a prime p,
p = x2 + 93y 2 for some x, y ∈ Z ⇐⇒
p ≡ 1, 25, 49, 97, 109, 121, 133, 157, 169, 193, 205, 253, 289, 349, 361 mod 372.
We can similarly prove statements of type (2) for all 65 numbers in Table 1. Con-
versely, the method of proof can be combined with the methods of genus theory to
establish criteria for n to be a convenient number [3].
We can also prove some similar statements for non-convenient numbers. For ex-
ample, if n = 14, Euler made the following conjecture for all primes p 6= 2, 7,
p = x2 + 14y 2
 
(3) ⇐⇒ p ≡ 1, 9, 15, 23, 25, 39 mod 56.
or p = 2x2 + 7y 2
This theorem is the strongest possible true statement for n = 14 that uses only
congruences. One can show by elementary means [4] that there is no choice of modulus
N for which a statement of type (2) is true when n = 14. We note that both of the
forms in (3) represent primes is each of the specified congruence classes and that no
prime can be represented by both forms. For instance, 113, 281 are both primes p ≡ 1
mod 56. But 281 = 152 +14(2)2 , 113 = 2(5)2 +7(3)2 , and neither prime is represented
by the other form. Euler also conjectured that for a prime p,
(4) 3p = x2 + 14y 2 ⇐⇒ p ≡ 3, 5, 13, 19, 27, 45 mod 56.

Convenient Numbers n h(−4n)

1, 2, 3, 4, 7 1
5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 15, 16, 18, 22, 25, 28, 37, 58 2
21, 24, 30, 33, 40, 42, 45, 48, 57, 60, 70, 72, 78, 85, 88, 93, 4
102, 112, 130, 133, 177, 190, 232, 253
105, 120, 165, 168, 210, 240, 273, 280, 312, 330, 345, 357, 8
385, 408, 462, 520, 760
840, 1320, 1365, 1848 16
Table 1. Table of the 65 known convenient numbers and the class
numbers h(−4n) of the group of binary quadratic forms with discrim-
inant −4n.
 GEOMETRY OF NUMBERS 3

We can use the geometry of numbers to prove both (3) and (4).
The subject of convenient numbers and genus theory is a rich one. For more
information on these areas and the complete answer to when we can express a prime
p in the form p = x2 + ny 2 , we encourage the reader to consult [1].

1. Quadratic Reciprocity
The law of quadratic reciprocity, discovered by Euler and Legendre and first proved
by Gauss [2], gives an efficient way to determine the squares mod p, for an odd prime
p. The Legendre symbol is defined for numbers a with (a, p) = 1 by
  (
a 1, if a is a non-zero square mod p,
=
p −1, if a is a not a square mod p.
3 2
= 1 as 52 ≡ 3 mod 11, whereas 11



Thus, 11 = −1 as none of the squares
12 , 22 , . . . , 102 modulo 11 equals 2. The following properties of the Legendre symbol
are easy to prove.
   
a b
Lemma 1. 1. If a ≡ b mod p, then = .
  p p
−1
2. = (−1)(p − 1)/2 .
p     
ab a b
3. Let a, b be relatively prime to p. Then = .
p p p
−1


By part (2) of the lemma,
−2

−1

2
= −1 and −1 is not a square mod 11. By part
11
(3) of the lemma, 11 = 11 11 = (−1)(−1) = 1 and −2 is a square mod 11,
as −2 ≡ 9 ≡ 32
mod 11 demonstrates. The law of quadratic reciprocity makes the
calculation of ap quite easy for large a, p.
Proposition 2 (The Law of Quadratic Reciprocity [2]). Let p, q be two odd primes.
  
p q p−1 q−1
1. = (−1) 2 · 2 .
q p (
p2 −1
 
2 1, if p ≡ 1, 7 mod 8,
2. = (−1) 8 =
p −1, if p ≡ 3, 5 mod 8,
Example. We can now easily determine if 2, 31 are squares mod 71. Since 71 ≡ 7
mod 8, 2 is a square. Trial and error shows that 122 ≡ 2 mod 71. Now
       
31 31−1 71−1 71 71 9
= (−1) 2 2 =− =− = −(+1) = −1,
71 31 31 31
so 31 is not a square mod 71. The first equality follows from part (2) of the proposition
and the third equality follows from part (1) of Lemma 1.
The following lemma follows quickly from the law of quadratic reciprocity.
Lemma 2. Let p be an odd prime and n a positive integer with (n, p) = 1. Then
−n 2 2


p = 1 ⇐⇒ p|x + ny , for some relatively prime integers x, y.
4 T. R. HAGEDORN

Proof. If −n = 1, then −n ≡ x2 mod p for some x ∈ Z. So p|x2 + n = x2 + n · 12 .

p
Conversely, if p|x2 +ny 2 , then x2 ≡ 2

−ny mod p. If y 6≡ 0 mod p, then y is invertible
2 −n
and (x/y) ≡ −n mod p. So p = 1. In fact, this case must occur as y ≡ 0 mod p
implies x ≡ 0 mod p and then p would be a common divisor of x, y, contradicting
the given. 
The following proposition is a crucial one that establishes the congruence criteria
for a prime p.
Proposition 3. Let n ≥ 1, and p be an odd prime with p - n such that p = x2 + ny 2 .
p

1. −n


p = 1 and q = 1 for every odd prime q|n.
2. If n ≡ 0, 1 mod 4, then p ≡ 1 mod 4.
3. If 8|n, then p ≡ 1 mod 8.
Proof. Part (1) follows immediately from reduction mod q and from Lemma 2 as x, y
must be relatively prime. Since x, y cannot both be even, x2 + ny 2 ≡ a + bn mod 4,
where a, b = 0, 1. If n ≡ 0, 1 mod 4, then p ≡ a + bn ≡ 0, 1 mod 4. Since p is odd,
p ≡ 1 mod 4. Part (3) follows similarly by working mod 8. 

2. Minkowski’s Geometry of Numbers and Convenient Numbers

An amazing discovery of 19th -century mathematics was Minkowski’s simple use of
geometry to prove theorems in about numbers. We will apply his methods to reprove
Gauss’s result that the 65 numbers in Table 1 found by Euler are all convenient
number.
We begin by recalling some geometric definitions. We say a subset R of R2 is
symmetric if −x ∈ R whenever x ∈ R. We say R is convex if for all points x, y ∈ R,
the line segment l connecting x, y is contained in R. In particular, the midpoint
(x + y)/2 of l is an element of R.
Lastly, a lattice L in R2 is the set of integral linear combinations av + bw, a, b ∈ Z,
for two linearly independent vectors v, w ∈ R2 . A fundamental domain for L is the
region of R2 defined by
F = { rv + sw| 0 ≤ r, s < 1, r, s ∈ R}.
F has the property that one can translate every point x ∈ R2 by an element of the
lattice L to a point in F. In other words, x = l + y, for some l ∈ L, y ∈ F. From
linear algebra, the area of F equals | det M |, where M is the matrix whose rows are
the vectors v, w. If v, w ∈ Z2 , then L is a subgroup of Z2 , and the area of F equals
its index [Z2 : L].
The following simple geometric proposition is the foundation for Minkowski’s Ge-
ometry of Numbers.
Proposition 4 (Minkowski). Let L be a lattice in R2 whose fundamental domain
has area V . If R is a convex, symmetric subset of R2 with Area(R) > 4V , then R
contains a non-zero point of L.
Proof. Consider the lattice 2L. Since 2L has index 4 in L, its fundamental domain
has area 4V . Now translate every point of R by a vector in 2L into the fundamental
 GEOMETRY OF NUMBERS 5

domain for 2L. Since Area(R) > 4V , there must be two points x, y ∈ R whose
translates coincide. Hence x = y + 2z, for some non-zero element z ∈ L. Now if
y ∈ R, then −y ∈ R since R is symmetric. And if −y, y + 2z ∈ R, then the midpoint
of the line connecting them [−y + (y + 2z)]/2 = z must be in R since R is convex.
Hence R contains a non-zero point of L. 
It is well-known that the Geometry of Numbers can be used to prove Fermat’s
theorem that an odd prime p can be expressed as p = x2 + y 2 precisely when p ≡ 1
mod 4 [5]. We illustrate the method for n = 3 to prove:
Proposition 5. Let p 6= 3 be a prime. Then p = x2 + 3y 2 for some integers x, y if
and only if p ≡ 1 mod 3.
Proof. (⇒) We know p 6= 2. Then by Proposition 3, −3


p = 1. By quadratic reci-
procity,           
−3 −1 3 −1 p−1 3 p
= = (−1) 2 = .
p p p p p 3
p

Hence 3 = 1 and p ≡ 1 mod 3. (⇐) Reversing the above implications, we have
−3 2


p = 1 and there exists an integer u such that u ≡ −3 mod p. Now consider the
lattice L ⊂ R2 defined by
L = {(a, b) ∈ Z2 |a ≡ ub mod p}.
L is generated by the vectors v = (u, 1), w = (0, p) and it is straight-forward to see
that L has index p in Z2 . Consequently, the area of its fundamental domain√ has area
p. Let Rk be the ellipse defined by x2 + 3y 2 = k. Then Rk has area πk/ 3 > 1.8k.
Choose k = 2.3p. Then Area Rk > 4p, and Rk ∩ L contains a non-zero point (a, b).
Now
a2 + 3b2 ≡ (ub)2 + 3b2 ≡ −3b2 + 3b2 ≡ 0 mod p,
so p|a2 + 3b2 . Now since (a, b) ∈ Rk , we have a2 + 3b2 < 2.3p, so a2 + 3b2 = p or
2p. We now show that a2 + 3b2 = 2p cannot occur. Suppose a2 + 3b2 = 2p, then
a2 ≡ 2p ≡ 2 mod 3, which gives a contradiction. Hence a2 + 3b2 = p. 
We can prove Proposition 1 and similar statements for all 65 convenient numbers
by slight modifications of this argument. Analyzing the proof, we see there are three
steps:
1. Use Proposition 3, to determine congruence criteria for when p = x2 + ny 2 .
2. For a prime p satisfying the congruence criteria in (1), Minkowski’s Geometry of
Numbers shows that x2 + ny 2 = dp has a solution (a, b) for some positive integer
def √
d ≤ Bn = [4 n/π].
3∗ For each d satisfying 1 < d ≤ Bn , use congruence conditions to show that either
the equation x2 + ny 2 = dp has no solution.
When n = 3, we saw that B3 = 2 and equation x2 + 3y 2 = dp had a solution for
d = 1 or 2. We
further showed that the equation x2 + 3y 2 = 2p could not have a
solution since 32 = −1. It is simple to generalize this argument with the following
useful lemma:
6 T. R. HAGEDORN

Lemma 3. Let q - d be an odd prime factor of n. If pq = 1 and dq = −1, then the

equation x2 + ny 2 = dp has no solution in integers.

Proof. Since pq = 1, q 6= p. If a2 + nb2 = dp, then a2 ≡ dp 6≡ 0 mod q. So dp

q = 1,
but this contradicts the hypothesis. Hence, there is no solution to x2 + ny 2 = dp. 

Let us now try our method to prove a proposition similar to Proposition 5 for
n = 93. We will run into one new situation.

Proof of Proposition 1. (⇒) follows immediately using Proposition 3. We now show

(⇐). Since B93 = 12, following the proof of Proposition 5, using n = 93 in place
of n = 3, we find that there is a positive integer d ≤ 12 such that the equation
x2 + 93y 2 = dp has a solution for some positive integers a, b. We will now show that
d = 1 has this property by considering the other possible choices for d.

The choices d = 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11 can be eliminated by Lemma 3 as d3 = −1 or
d

p
p

31 = −1. We note that 3 = 31 = 1 by the given congruence conditions for p.
That leaves the choices d = 4, 9, 10, 12. If d = 4, then a2 + b2 ≡ 0 mod 4, which
forces a, b to both be even. Thus (a/2)2 + 93(b/2)2 = p and the original equation
x2 + 93y 2 = p has a solution. So x2 + 93y 2 = 4p has a solution precisely when
x2 + 93y 2 = p has a solution. The same situation occurs when d = 9, 12.
Hence, we are left to analyze the case d = 10. If x2 + 93y 2 = 10p, then reducing
modulo 4, x2 + y 2 ≡ 2 mod 4 and one sees that x, y must both be odd. So x2 , y 2 ≡ 1
mod 8 and x2 + 93y 2 ≡ x2 + 5y 2 ≡ 6 mod 8. But as 10p ≡ 2 mod 8, x2 + 93y 2 6≡ 10p
mod 8 and x2 + 93y 2 = 10p cannot have a solution.
Summarizing, we have seen that every choice of d 6= 1 either leads to a contradiction
or shows that the equation x2 +93y 2 = p has a solution. Thus, the equation x2 +93y 2 =
p has a solution. 

In light of the new wrinkle caused by the cases d = 4, 9 in the above proof, we need
to replace step 3∗ above by the following:
3. For each d satisfying 1 < d ≤ Bn , use congruence conditions to show that either
the equation x2 + ny 2 = dp has no solution or that a solution of x2 + ny 2 = dp
leads to a solution of x2 + ny 2 = p.
Unfortunately, the case d = 10 in the above proof shows that the congruence argu-
ments needed in Step 2 can be more involved than simply using Lemma 3. There
are two additional congruence arguments we need. As Lemma 3 only applies to odd
primes, we need to establish some congruence arguments for the prime 2. As one
often sees when working with the even prime 2, we will have congruences modulo
powers of 2. The second new congruence argument we will need is best illustrated
in the proof that n = 57 is a convenient number. The new methods appear when
considering the choices d = 6, 7.
Proposition 6. Let p be a prime. Then
p = x2 + 57y 2 ⇐⇒ p ≡ 1, 25, 49, 61, 73, 85, 121, 157, 169 mod 228.
 GEOMETRY OF NUMBERS 7

Proof. (⇒) follows from Proposition 3. (⇐) Formally following the proof of Propo-
sition 1, we find that x2 + 57y 2 = dp has a solution for some positive integer d ≤ 9.
There four distinct situations to consider.
i. The cases d = 2, 3, 5, 8 cannot occur by Lemma 3 as either d3 = −1 or 31 d



= −1.
ii. d = 4, 9. As in the proof of Proposition 1, one can show the equation x + 57y 2 =
2

dp has a solution precisely when x2 + 57y 2 = p has a solution.

iii. d = 6. If x2 + 57y 2 = 6p, then 3|x. Let x = 3z. Then 3z 2 + 19y 2 = 2p. Reducing
this equation modulo 3, we have y 2 ≡ 2p ≡ 2, giving a contradiction. So when
d = 6, there is no solution.
iv. d =
7. As p 6= 7, 7p is squarefree and if x2 + 57y 2 = 7p then (x,
y) = 1. Then
−57 −57
7 = 1 by Lemma 2. But quadratic reciprocity shows 7 = −1, which
would give a contradiction. So d = 7 cannot occur.
As every choice of d 6= 1 either leads to a contradiction or shows that the equation
x2 + 57y 2 = p has a solution, the proposition is proved. 
Generalizing the new arguments we made in the cases d = 6, 7 in the previous
proof, we have the following lemma.
Lemma 4. Let p be an odd prime. (a). Suppose that q 6= p is an odd prime such that
q|(n, d), q 2 - d, and q 2 - n. If x2 +ny 2 = dp has a solution, then q 2 |n and n/q dp



q = q .
(b). Assume x2 + ny 2 = dp has a solution and q 6
= p is an odd prime divisor of d
2 −n


with q - d, q - n. Then q = 1.
We summarize in the following proposition all the needed congruence arguments,
including the additional ones for the prime 2 and for d = 9 (whose proofs we omit).
Proposition 7. Given n, assume that the prime p satisfies the congruence conditions
listed in Proposition 3. If (n, d) satisfies one of the following conditions, then either
the equation x2 + ny 2 = dp has no solution or if it has a solution, then the equation
x2 + ny 2 = d0 p has a solution for some positive integer d0 < d.
a. There is an odd prime factor q of n with q - d with dq = −1.

b. There is an odd prime factor q of d with q - n, q 2 - d and −n

q = −1.
c. There exists an odd prime q|(n, d) with q 2 - d, q 2 - n such that n/q d



q 6
= q .
k
d. There is an odd integer k such that 2 is the highest power of 2 dividing (n, d) and
either 2k+1 |n or 2k+1 |d.
e. n ≡ 3 mod 4 and d = 2.
f. n ≡ 1 mod 4 and 4|d.
g. n ≡ 7 mod 8 or n ≡ 0, 8, 12 mod 16, and d = 4.
h. 4|n and d ≡ 3 mod 4.
i. 8|n and d = 5.
j. n ≡ 48 mod 64 and d ≡ 16 mod 64.
k. n ≡ 18 mod 27 and d = 9.
Using this proposition when analyzing the choices of d that arise in the proofs of
statements of type (2), we can easily prove the following.
Corollary 1. The 65 values in Table 1 are convenient numbers.
8 T. R. HAGEDORN

3. Applications to x2 + ny 2 = pq and Non-Convenient Numbers

Minkowski’s Geometry of Numbers can be used in a similar way as in the previous
section to prove theorems about the expressibility of specific composite numbers by
a quadratic form. For example, we can prove the second statement in (1) using the
same methods used to prove Proposition 5. By slightly modifying the method of
proof, we can also prove the following similar statement.
Proposition 8. Let p, q ≡ 3, 7 (mod 20) be odd primes. Then pq = x2 + 5y 2 for
some integers x, y.
Proof. The congruence conditions give −5 = −5



p q = 1. So there exists solutions
2 2
to the equations x ≡ −5 (mod p), x ≡ −5 (mod q). By the Chinese Remainder
Theorem, there is an integer u such that u2 ≡ −5 mod pq. Now consider the lattice
L ⊂ R2 defined by
L = {(a, b) ∈ Z2 | a ≡ ub mod pq}.
As L has index pq in Z2 , its fundamental domain
√ has area pq. Let Rk be the ellipse
2 2
defined by x + 5y = k. Then Rk has area πk/ 5 > 1.4k. Choose k = 2.9pq. Then
Area Rk > 4pq, and Rk ∩ L contains a non-zero point (a, b). Now
a2 + 5b2 ≡ (ub)2 + 5b2 ≡ −5b2 + 5b2 ≡ 0 mod pq,
so pq|a2 + 5b2 . Now since (a, b) ∈ Rk , we have a2 + 5b2 < 2.9p, so a2 + 5b2 = pq or
2pq. Now if a2 + 5b2 = 2pq, then regarding the equation mod 5 shows that 2pq ≡ ±2
(mod 5) is a square, giving a contradiction. Hence a2 + 5b2 = pq. 
It is straightforward to see that one can prove statements similar to Proposition 8
and (1) for any convenient number n. But the usefulness of this method is not limited
solely to convenient numbers. It can prove a limited number of similar statements
for other numbers. For example, as n = 14 is not a convenient number, we cannot
prove a statement regarding x2 +14y 2 = p. Nevertheless, we can reprove the following
conjecture of Euler.
Proposition 9. Let p be a prime. Then 3p = x2 + 14y 2 for some integers x, y ⇐⇒
p ≡ 3, 5, 13, 19, 27, 45 mod 56.
Proof. (a)(⇒) We can
assume p 6= 2, 3, 7. Then any solution (x, y) must be relatively
3p

prime. Then −14 p = 7 = 1 and quadratic reciprocity gives p ≡ 3, 5 (mod 8),
p ≡ 3, 5, 6 (mod 7), which gives the desired congruence. (⇐) By quadratic reciprocity,
the congruence conditions give −14


p = 1. So there exists an integer u such that
2
u ≡ −14 mod p. Then as in the proof of Proposition 5, we use u to construct a
lattice L, an ellipse Rk , and choose k such that Minkowski’s Theorem shows that
there is a solution (a, b) with a2 + 14b2 = dp, for some d = 1, 2, 3, 4. If d = 1, 2, 4, then
2 p

a ≡ dp (mod 7) and 7 = 1, contradicting the congruence conditions on p. Thus
d = 3 and a2 + 14b2 = 3p. 
Does Proposition 9 have a generalization similar to Proposition 8? Yes, Proposi-
tion 9 is but a specific case of the following more general proposition.
 GEOMETRY OF NUMBERS 9

Proposition 10. Let p, q be odd primes with p, q ≡ 3, 5, 13, 19, 27, 45 mod 56. Then
pq = x2 + 14y 2 for some integers x, y.
However, the methods of this paper are too weak to prove Proposition 10! In order
to prove it, we must use the more powerful methods of Gauss’s theory of genera. We
now illustrate the problem one encounters when one tries to generalize the proof of
Proposition 9 to prove Proposition 10.
Assume p, q are given as in the hypothesis of Propostion 10. Following the proof
of Proposition 8, one can show that there exists a solution to x2 + 14y 2 = pqd, for
some positive integer d ≤ 4. If d = 4, then x, y would

both be even,

and there
would
be a solution to x2 + 14y 2 = pq. If d = 3, then 3pq
7 = 1, but 3
7 = p

7 = q
7 = −1,
giving a contradiction. But when we consider the case d = 2, we cannot obtain a
contradiction as 2 is a square mod 7. As a result, we know that there is a solution to
the equation x2 + 14y 2 = pq or the equation x2 + 14y 2 = 2pq, but we cannot definitely
say that either equation can be solved!
Using genus theory one can show that the both equations can always be solved. We
now sketch a proof of both this claim and Proposition 10, and refer the reader to [1] for
background material. The class group of binary quadratic forms with discriminant
−68 consists of 4 forms divided up into two genera. The principal genus of forms
with discriminant −56 consists of e = x2 + 14y 2 , the identity element for the group,
and f = 2x2 + 7y 2 ; the other genus consists of the two forms g = 3x2 + 2xy + 5y 2 ,
h = 3x2 − 2xy + 5y 2 . By genus theory, one can show that primes p, q satisfying
the hypotheses in Proposition 10 are represented by either g or h. However, as g, h
represent exactly the same values in Z (since one can replace (x, y) by (−x, y)), we can
assume g represents p and h represents q. Gauss’s law of composition for quadratic
forms then shows that pq is represented by the form e = g ◦ h. Hence x2 + 14y 2 = pq
has a solution, proving Proposition 10. Similarly, f represents the number 2, so
h = f ◦ g represents 2p. Since g represents q, we have that 2pq is represented by
g ◦ h = e, and x2 + 14y 2 = 2pq has a solution as well.

References
2 2
[1] D. Cox, Primes of the Form x + ny : Fermat, Class Field Theory, and Complex Multiplication,
Wiley, 1997.
[2] C. F. Gauss, (1801) Disquisitiones Aritmeticae, trans. by Arthur A. Clarke, Yale University
Press, 1965.
[3] T. Hagedorn, Lower Bounds for the 66th Convenient Number, in preparation.
[4] B. Spearman, K. S. Williams, Representing Primes by Binary Quadratic Forms, American Math-
ematical Monthly, 99(5) (1992), pp. 423-426
[5] I. Stewart, D. Tall, Algebraic Number Theory and Fermat’s Last Theorem, 3rd Ed., A.K. Peters,
Natick, MA 2001.
[6] A. Weil, Number Theory: An Approach Through History, Birkhäuser, Boston, Basel, and
Stuttgart, 1984.
[7] P.J. Weinberger, Exponents of the class groups of complex quadratic fields, Acta Arith. 22 (1973),
pp. 117–124.
E-mail address: hagedorn@tcnj.edu

Department of Mathematics and Statistics, The College of New Jersey, P.O. Box
7718, Ewing, NJ 08628