|
Page 1 of 1
|
[ 7 posts ] |
|
Share:
|
| Author |
Message |
Peter
Posts: 5245 Location: Ghent
|
Posted: May 24, 2007, 5:24 pm •
# 1
Let  is a prime number and  . Prove that  is divisible by  .
|
|
|
darij grinberg
Posts: 5937 Location: Karlsruhe / Munich
|
Posted: May 24, 2007, 5:24 pm •
# 2
Peter wrote: Let  is a prime number and  . Prove that  is divisible by  .
I will assume paragraphs 1. and 2. of http://www.artofproblemsolving.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?t=150391 (or http://www.problem-solving.be/pen/viewtopic.php?t=25 ) post #4 as known.
We have to prove that  .
In http://www.artofproblemsolving.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?t=150400 (or http://www.problem-solving.be/pen/viewtopic.php?t=34 ) post #2, Theorem 1, I showed that  . This rewrites as  , where we are working with fractions modulo  (what is allowed in our case because the denominators are integers  satisfying  , and these integers are not divisible by  ). In other words,  .
Now we prove a simple lemma:
Lemma 1. If is a prime and is an integer satisfying , then .
Proof of Lemma 1. We have  , and thus
 .
Now,  is coprime with  (since  , and all the numbers  ,  , ...,  are coprime with  since  is a prime and  ); hence, we can divide this congruence by  , and obtain  . Lemma 1 is proven.
Now, for every integer  satisfying  , Lemma 1 yields  , so that  becomes  . In other words,
 .
Together with  , this yields
 .
But
 .
Hence, we get  . Since  is an integer, this means  , qed.
Note that this problem also appeared as question 2 in the 11th Annual Vojtech Jarnik International Mathematical Competition 2001, Category I. See also http://www.artofproblemsolving.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?t=151379 .
Darij
Last edited by darij grinberg on Jan 17, 2009, 2:55 pm, edited 3 times in total.
|
|
|
ricardokaka
Posts: 84
|
Posted: Nov 19, 2007, 10:17 pm •
# 3
Where's the lemma no 2?  , Mr darij grinberg?
|
|
|
ricardokaka
Posts: 84
|
Posted: Nov 20, 2007, 8:20 am •
# 4
We haven't any exact and simple solutions, example: the Darij's solution! I think that this isn't a hard problem and we can solve it more simply and purer! I cann't understand the termes, example: "p-ardic"... Help me, please!
|
|
|
Peter
Posts: 5245 Location: Ghent
|
Posted: Nov 20, 2007, 7:31 pm •
# 5
ricardokaka wrote: I think that this isn't a hard problem and we can solve it more simply and purer! Then post your solution, please!
I also believe p-adic numbers can be avoided.
_________________ Boo!
|
|
|
ZetaX
Posts: 6340 Location: München
|
Posted: Nov 21, 2007, 11:39 am •
# 6
Sorry, but p-adic numbers were never used in any of the proofs (even not in the linked ones).
_________________ IMO Shortlist 2010 revealed!
|
|
|
Rust
Posts: 3853
|
Posted: Nov 24, 2007, 9:20 am •
# 7
darij grinberg wrote: Now, for every integer  satisfying  , Lemma 1 yields  , so that  becomes  . In other words, Darij
I don't see prove. I give full solution at least 2 times.
Let  . Then
Let  . Obviosly  .
Consider
It give ![\sum_{i=0}^{[(a-2)/2]}(a-1-2i)S_{i,a}=aT_a\mod p](http://data.artofproblemsolving.com/images/latex/e/1/5/e1573b7cc4308541219b356f4a21fa9a7e421496.gif) , were  .
Because  , we get
It give 
|
|
|
Share:
|
Page 1 of 1
|
[ 7 posts ] |
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|
|