AoPSWiki
Looking for a challenging geometry text? Preparing for MATHCOUNTS or the AMC exams? Check out Art of Problem Solving's Introduction to Geometry by Richard Rusczyk.

2004 IMO Shortlist Problems/N3

From AoPSWiki

Contents

Problem

(Mohsen Jamali, Iran) A function \displaystyle f from the set of positive integers \mathbf{N} to itself is such that for all m, n \in \mathbf{N} the number \displaystyle (m^2 +n)^2 is divisible by \displaystyle f^2(m) + f(n). Prove that \displaystyle f(n) = n for each n \in \mathbf{N}.


Comment by the proposer. A possible version of this question is:

Find all functions f :  \mathbf{N}\rightarrow \mathbf{N} such that for all m,n \in \mathbf{N}, the number \displaystyle (m^2 +n)^2 is divisible by \displaystyle f^2(m) + f(n).


This alternative form was also Problem 3 of the 2005 5th Romanian TST, Problem 1 of the 3rd independent study of the 2005 3rd Taiwan TST, and Problem 3 of the 2005 French Mathematical Olympiad, Dossier 4.

Note: Although strictly speaking, \displaystyle f^2(x) denotes \displaystyle f(f(x)), in this context it is clear that it means \displaystyle [f(x)]^2.

Solutions

Solution 1

Lemma 1. \displaystyle f(1) = 1.

Proof. We must have [f(1)]^2 + f(1) \mid (1^2+1)^2 = 4. But for any integer \displaystyle y > 1, y^2 + y \ge 6, so we must have \displaystyle f(1) = 1.

Lemma 2. For all natural \displaystyle n, f(n) \le n^2, with equality only when \displaystyle n=1.

Proof. We note that \displaystyle [f(n)]^2 + f(1) = [f(n)]^2 + 1 divides \displaystyle (n^2+1)^2. But if f(n) \ge n^2+1, then \displaystyle [f(n)]^2 + 1 > (n^2 + 1)^2, a contradiction. Now, if \displaystyle n>1, then we must have \displaystyle f(n) + 1 \mid (n+1)^2; since \displaystyle (n+1)^2/2 < n^2 + 1 < (n+1)^2, n^2 +1 \nmid (n+1)^2, so we know that \displaystyle f(n) \neq n^2.

Lemma 3. For any prime \displaystyle p, \displaystyle f(p-1) = p-1.

Proof. We know f(1) + f(p-1) = 1 + f(p-1) \mid p^2. Since \displaystyle f(p-1) is positive, either \displaystyle f(p-1) = p-1, or \displaystyle f(p-1) = p^2 -1. But \displaystyle p^2 -1 > (p-1)^2, so by Lemma 2, \displaystyle f(p-1) = p-1.

Now, for any natural number \displaystyle n and any natural number \displaystyle k that is one less than a prime, we have [f(k)]^2 + f(n) = k^2 + f(n) \mid (k^2 + n)^2. But for some integer \displaystyle A,

\displaystyle (k^2 + n)^2 = \{[k^2 + f(n]+[n-f(n)]\}^2 = A[k^2 + f(n)] + [n-f(n)]^2.

Hence k^2 + f(n) \mid [n-f(n)]^2. This means that \displaystyle [n-f(n)]^2 has infinitely many divisors, i.e., it is equal to zero. Hence for all natural \displaystyle n, \displaystyle f(n) = n.


Solution 2

We use Lemmata 1–3 of the previous solution.

For natural \displaystyle n, we define \displaystyle \varpi(n) to be product of all primes less than or equal to \displaystyle n.

Lemma 4. For all n\ge 17, \displaystyle \varpi(n) > n^4.

Proof. We will use strong induction. We note that \displaystyle 2 \cdot 5 \cdot 7 \cdot 11 = 770 > 2\cdot 18^2, and \displaystyle 3 \cdot 13 > 18, and \displaystyle 17 > 18/2, so \displaystyle \varpi(18) = \varpi(17) > 18^4 > 17^4. Now, for all integers 19 \le n \le 36,
\varpi(n) \ge 19 \cdot \varpi(17) > 2^4 \cdot \pi(17) > 2^4\cdot 18^4 = 36^4 \ge n^4.

This establishes our base case. Now, for \displaystyle n > 36, suppose that the lemma holds for all integers 17 \le k \le n-1. By Bertrand's Postulate, there exists a prime \displaystyle p_1 greater than \lceil n/2 \rceil and less than or equal to \displaystyle n. Thus

\varpi(n) \ge p_1 \cdot \varpi(\lceil n/2 \rceil) > p_1 \cdot (\lceil n/2 \rceil)^4 \ge p_1 \cdot (n/2)^4 > n/2 \cdot (....

Thus our lemma holds by strong induction.

We will now prove that for all natural \displaystyle n, \displaystyle f(n) = n.

If this is not true, then there is a least \displaystyle n_0 for which this is not true.

Lemma 5. If \displaystyle n_0 exists, then it is not prime.

Proof. Suppose the contrary. One of the numbers [f(n_0)]^2, [f(n_0)]^2 + 1, \ldots, [f(n_0)]^2 + n_0 -1 must be divisible by \displaystyle n_0. But since [f(n_0)]^2 +1 ,\ldots, [f(n_0)]^2 + n_0-1 must divide {} (n_0^2+1)^2, \ldots,  (n_0^2+n_0-1)^2, none of which can be divisible by \displaystyle n_0, we conclude that n_0 \mid [f(n_0)]^2 and hence n_0 \mid f(n_0). Furthermore, for any prime \displaystyle p< n_0, \displaystyle [f(n_0)]^2+p cannot be divisible by \displaystyle p, since it is a divisor of \displaystyle (n_0^2+p)^2, which is not divisible by \displaystyle p, so p \nmid f(n_0). Since \displaystyle f(n_0) < n_0^2, it follows that \displaystyle n_0 is the only prime divisor of \displaystyle f(n_0) and again since \displaystyle f(n_0) < n_0^2, \displaystyle f(n_0) = n_0, a contradiction.

Lemma 6. If \displaystyle n_0 exists, then none of the numbers n_0^2+1, \ldots, n_0^2 + n_0 -1 is prime.

Proof. Suppose, on the contrary, that \displaystyle n_0^2 + k is prime, for some integer 1 \le k \le n_0-1. We know [f(n_0)]^2 + k \mid p^2. But since \displaystyle 1< [f(n_0)]^2 +k < n_0^4 + k < (n_0^2+k)^2 = p^2, we must have \displaystyle [f(n_0)]^2 +k = n_0^2 + k, which implies \displaystyle f(n_0) = n_0, a contradiction.

We now claim that \displaystyle n_0 does not exist. Since neither \displaystyle n_0 nor \displaystyle n_0+1 may be prime (by Lemmata 5 and 3), the only possibilities for \displaystyle n_0 < 17 are 8, 9, 14, and 15. But \displaystyle 8^2 + 3 = 67, \displaystyle 9^2 + 8 = 89, \displaystyle 14^2+1 = 197, and \displaystyle 15^2 +2 = 227 are all prime, by Lemma 6, we conclude that n\ge 17. But for each prime \displaystyle p less than \displaystyle n_0, one of the numbers

[f(n_0)]^2+1, \ldots, [f(n_0)]^2 + p

must be divisible by \displaystyle p. Since these divide (n_0^2 + 1)^2, \ldots, (n_0^2 + p)^2, the only one of these which can be divisible by \displaystyle p is \displaystyle [f(n_0)]^2 + k, where \displaystyle k is the integer between 1 and \displaystyle p such that k \equiv -n_0^2 \pmod{p}. It follows that for all primes \displaystyle p less than \displaystyle n,

[f(n_0)]^2 \equiv n_0^2 \pmod{p}.

By the Chinese Remainder Theorem, then,

[f(n_0)]^2 \equiv n_0^2 \pmod{\varpi(n_0)}.

But by Lemma 4, the only solutions to this congruence other than \displaystyle [f(n_0)]^2 = n_0^2 are negative numbers (which are clearly impossible), and solutions which imply \displaystyle [f(n_0)^2] > n^2 + n^4. But by Lemma 2, this implies \displaystyle n^4 > [f(n_0)]^2 > n^2 + n^4, a contradiction. Thus \displaystyle n_0 does not exist, so there is no integer \displaystyle n such that \displaystyle f(n) \neq n. Q.E.D.


Alternate solutions are always welcome. If you have a different, elegant solution to this problem, please add it to this page.

Resources

Visit the AoPS Book Store.
© Copyright 2008 AoPS Incorporated. All Rights Reserved. • FoundationPrivacyContact Us