Stay ahead of learning milestones! Enroll in a class over the summer!

G
Topic
First Poster
Last Poster
k a April Highlights and 2025 AoPS Online Class Information
jlacosta   0
Apr 2, 2025
Spring is in full swing and summer is right around the corner, what are your plans? At AoPS Online our schedule has new classes starting now through July, so be sure to keep your skills sharp and be prepared for the Fall school year! Check out the schedule of upcoming classes below.

WOOT early bird pricing is in effect, don’t miss out! If you took MathWOOT Level 2 last year, no worries, it is all new problems this year! Our Worldwide Online Olympiad Training program is for high school level competitors. AoPS designed these courses to help our top students get the deep focus they need to succeed in their specific competition goals. Check out the details at this link for all our WOOT programs in math, computer science, chemistry, and physics.

Looking for summer camps in math and language arts? Be sure to check out the video-based summer camps offered at the Virtual Campus that are 2- to 4-weeks in duration. There are middle and high school competition math camps as well as Math Beasts camps that review key topics coupled with fun explorations covering areas such as graph theory (Math Beasts Camp 6), cryptography (Math Beasts Camp 7-8), and topology (Math Beasts Camp 8-9)!

Be sure to mark your calendars for the following events:
[list][*]April 3rd (Webinar), 4pm PT/7:00pm ET, Learning with AoPS: Perspectives from a Parent, Math Camp Instructor, and University Professor
[*]April 8th (Math Jam), 4:30pm PT/7:30pm ET, 2025 MATHCOUNTS State Discussion
April 9th (Webinar), 4:00pm PT/7:00pm ET, Learn about Video-based Summer Camps at the Virtual Campus
[*]April 10th (Math Jam), 4:30pm PT/7:30pm ET, 2025 MathILy and MathILy-Er Math Jam: Multibackwards Numbers
[*]April 22nd (Webinar), 4:00pm PT/7:00pm ET, Competitive Programming at AoPS (USACO).[/list]
Our full course list for upcoming classes is below:
All classes run 7:30pm-8:45pm ET/4:30pm - 5:45pm PT unless otherwise noted.

Introductory: Grades 5-10

Prealgebra 1 Self-Paced

Prealgebra 1
Sunday, Apr 13 - Aug 10
Tuesday, May 13 - Aug 26
Thursday, May 29 - Sep 11
Sunday, Jun 15 - Oct 12
Monday, Jun 30 - Oct 20
Wednesday, Jul 16 - Oct 29

Prealgebra 2 Self-Paced

Prealgebra 2
Sunday, Apr 13 - Aug 10
Wednesday, May 7 - Aug 20
Monday, Jun 2 - Sep 22
Sunday, Jun 29 - Oct 26
Friday, Jul 25 - Nov 21

Introduction to Algebra A Self-Paced

Introduction to Algebra A
Monday, Apr 7 - Jul 28
Sunday, May 11 - Sep 14 (1:00 - 2:30 pm ET/10:00 - 11:30 am PT)
Wednesday, May 14 - Aug 27
Friday, May 30 - Sep 26
Monday, Jun 2 - Sep 22
Sunday, Jun 15 - Oct 12
Thursday, Jun 26 - Oct 9
Tuesday, Jul 15 - Oct 28

Introduction to Counting & Probability Self-Paced

Introduction to Counting & Probability
Wednesday, Apr 16 - Jul 2
Thursday, May 15 - Jul 31
Sunday, Jun 1 - Aug 24
Thursday, Jun 12 - Aug 28
Wednesday, Jul 9 - Sep 24
Sunday, Jul 27 - Oct 19

Introduction to Number Theory
Thursday, Apr 17 - Jul 3
Friday, May 9 - Aug 1
Wednesday, May 21 - Aug 6
Monday, Jun 9 - Aug 25
Sunday, Jun 15 - Sep 14
Tuesday, Jul 15 - Sep 30

Introduction to Algebra B Self-Paced

Introduction to Algebra B
Wednesday, Apr 16 - Jul 30
Tuesday, May 6 - Aug 19
Wednesday, Jun 4 - Sep 17
Sunday, Jun 22 - Oct 19
Friday, Jul 18 - Nov 14

Introduction to Geometry
Wednesday, Apr 23 - Oct 1
Sunday, May 11 - Nov 9
Tuesday, May 20 - Oct 28
Monday, Jun 16 - Dec 8
Friday, Jun 20 - Jan 9
Sunday, Jun 29 - Jan 11
Monday, Jul 14 - Jan 19

Intermediate: Grades 8-12

Intermediate Algebra
Monday, Apr 21 - Oct 13
Sunday, Jun 1 - Nov 23
Tuesday, Jun 10 - Nov 18
Wednesday, Jun 25 - Dec 10
Sunday, Jul 13 - Jan 18
Thursday, Jul 24 - Jan 22

Intermediate Counting & Probability
Wednesday, May 21 - Sep 17
Sunday, Jun 22 - Nov 2

Intermediate Number Theory
Friday, Apr 11 - Jun 27
Sunday, Jun 1 - Aug 24
Wednesday, Jun 18 - Sep 3

Precalculus
Wednesday, Apr 9 - Sep 3
Friday, May 16 - Oct 24
Sunday, Jun 1 - Nov 9
Monday, Jun 30 - Dec 8

Advanced: Grades 9-12

Olympiad Geometry
Tuesday, Jun 10 - Aug 26

Calculus
Tuesday, May 27 - Nov 11
Wednesday, Jun 25 - Dec 17

Group Theory
Thursday, Jun 12 - Sep 11

Contest Preparation: Grades 6-12

MATHCOUNTS/AMC 8 Basics
Wednesday, Apr 16 - Jul 2
Friday, May 23 - Aug 15
Monday, Jun 2 - Aug 18
Thursday, Jun 12 - Aug 28
Sunday, Jun 22 - Sep 21
Tues & Thurs, Jul 8 - Aug 14 (meets twice a week!)

MATHCOUNTS/AMC 8 Advanced
Friday, Apr 11 - Jun 27
Sunday, May 11 - Aug 10
Tuesday, May 27 - Aug 12
Wednesday, Jun 11 - Aug 27
Sunday, Jun 22 - Sep 21
Tues & Thurs, Jul 8 - Aug 14 (meets twice a week!)

AMC 10 Problem Series
Friday, May 9 - Aug 1
Sunday, Jun 1 - Aug 24
Thursday, Jun 12 - Aug 28
Tuesday, Jun 17 - Sep 2
Sunday, Jun 22 - Sep 21 (1:00 - 2:30 pm ET/10:00 - 11:30 am PT)
Monday, Jun 23 - Sep 15
Tues & Thurs, Jul 8 - Aug 14 (meets twice a week!)

AMC 10 Final Fives
Sunday, May 11 - Jun 8
Tuesday, May 27 - Jun 17
Monday, Jun 30 - Jul 21

AMC 12 Problem Series
Tuesday, May 27 - Aug 12
Thursday, Jun 12 - Aug 28
Sunday, Jun 22 - Sep 21
Wednesday, Aug 6 - Oct 22

AMC 12 Final Fives
Sunday, May 18 - Jun 15

F=ma Problem Series
Wednesday, Jun 11 - Aug 27

WOOT Programs
Visit the pages linked for full schedule details for each of these programs!


MathWOOT Level 1
MathWOOT Level 2
ChemWOOT
CodeWOOT
PhysicsWOOT

Programming

Introduction to Programming with Python
Thursday, May 22 - Aug 7
Sunday, Jun 15 - Sep 14 (1:00 - 2:30 pm ET/10:00 - 11:30 am PT)
Tuesday, Jun 17 - Sep 2
Monday, Jun 30 - Sep 22

Intermediate Programming with Python
Sunday, Jun 1 - Aug 24
Monday, Jun 30 - Sep 22

USACO Bronze Problem Series
Tuesday, May 13 - Jul 29
Sunday, Jun 22 - Sep 1

Physics

Introduction to Physics
Wednesday, May 21 - Aug 6
Sunday, Jun 15 - Sep 14
Monday, Jun 23 - Sep 15

Physics 1: Mechanics
Thursday, May 22 - Oct 30
Monday, Jun 23 - Dec 15

Relativity
Sat & Sun, Apr 26 - Apr 27 (4:00 - 7:00 pm ET/1:00 - 4:00pm PT)
Mon, Tue, Wed & Thurs, Jun 23 - Jun 26 (meets every day of the week!)
0 replies
jlacosta
Apr 2, 2025
0 replies
k i A Letter to MSM
Arr0w   23
N Sep 19, 2022 by scannose
Greetings.

I have seen many posts talking about commonly asked questions, such as finding the value of $0^0$, $\frac{1}{0}$,$\frac{0}{0}$, $\frac{\infty}{\infty}$, why $0.999...=1$ or even expressions of those terms combined as if that would make them defined. I have made this post to answer these questions once and for all, and I politely ask everyone to link this post to threads that are talking about this issue.
[list]
[*]Firstly, the case of $0^0$. It is usually regarded that $0^0=1$, not because this works numerically but because it is convenient to define it this way. You will see the convenience of defining other undefined things later on in this post.

[*]What about $\frac{\infty}{\infty}$? The issue here is that $\infty$ isn't even rigorously defined in this expression. What exactly do we mean by $\infty$? Unless the example in question is put in context in a formal manner, then we say that $\frac{\infty}{\infty}$ is meaningless.

[*]What about $\frac{1}{0}$? Suppose that $x=\frac{1}{0}$. Then we would have $x\cdot 0=0=1$, absurd. A more rigorous treatment of the idea is that $\lim_{x\to0}\frac{1}{x}$ does not exist in the first place, although you will see why in a calculus course. So the point is that $\frac{1}{0}$ is undefined.

[*]What about if $0.99999...=1$? An article from brilliant has a good explanation. Alternatively, you can just use a geometric series. Notice that
\begin{align*}
\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{9}{10^n}&=9\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{10^n}=9\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\biggr(\frac{1}{10}\biggr)^n=9\biggr(\frac{\frac{1}{10}}{1-\frac{1}{10}}\biggr)=9\biggr(\frac{\frac{1}{10}}{\frac{9}{10}}\biggr)=9\biggr(\frac{1}{9}\biggr)=\boxed{1}
\end{align*}
[*]What about $\frac{0}{0}$? Usually this is considered to be an indeterminate form, but I would also wager that this is also undefined.
[/list]
Hopefully all of these issues and their corollaries are finally put to rest. Cheers.

2nd EDIT (6/14/22): Since I originally posted this, it has since blown up so I will try to add additional information per the request of users in the thread below.

INDETERMINATE VS UNDEFINED

What makes something indeterminate? As you can see above, there are many things that are indeterminate. While definitions might vary slightly, it is the consensus that the following definition holds: A mathematical expression is be said to be indeterminate if it is not definitively or precisely determined. So how does this make, say, something like $0/0$ indeterminate? In analysis (the theory behind calculus and beyond), limits involving an algebraic combination of functions in an independent variable may often be evaluated by replacing these functions by their limits. However, if the expression obtained after this substitution does not provide sufficient information to determine the original limit, then the expression is called an indeterminate form. For example, we could say that $0/0$ is an indeterminate form.

But we need to more specific, this is still ambiguous. An indeterminate form is a mathematical expression involving at most two of $0$, $1$ or $\infty$, obtained by applying the algebraic limit theorem (a theorem in analysis, look this up for details) in the process of attempting to determine a limit, which fails to restrict that limit to one specific value or infinity, and thus does not determine the limit being calculated. This is why it is called indeterminate. Some examples of indeterminate forms are
\[0/0, \infty/\infty, \infty-\infty, \infty \times 0\]etc etc. So what makes something undefined? In the broader scope, something being undefined refers to an expression which is not assigned an interpretation or a value. A function is said to be undefined for points outside its domain. For example, the function $f:\mathbb{R}^{+}\cup\{0\}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}$ given by the mapping $x\mapsto \sqrt{x}$ is undefined for $x<0$. On the other hand, $1/0$ is undefined because dividing by $0$ is not defined in arithmetic by definition. In other words, something is undefined when it is not defined in some mathematical context.

WHEN THE WATERS GET MUDDIED

So with this notion of indeterminate and undefined, things get convoluted. First of all, just because something is indeterminate does not mean it is not undefined. For example $0/0$ is considered both indeterminate and undefined (but in the context of a limit then it is considered in indeterminate form). Additionally, this notion of something being undefined also means that we can define it in some way. To rephrase, this means that technically, we can make something that is undefined to something that is defined as long as we define it. I'll show you what I mean.

One example of making something undefined into something defined is the extended real number line, which we define as
\[\overline{\mathbb{R}}=\mathbb{R}\cup \{-\infty,+\infty\}.\]So instead of treating infinity as an idea, we define infinity (positively and negatively, mind you) as actual numbers in the reals. The advantage of doing this is for two reasons. The first is because we can turn this thing into a totally ordered set. Specifically, we can let $-\infty\le a\le \infty$ for each $a\in\overline{\mathbb{R}}$ which means that via this order topology each subset has an infimum and supremum and $\overline{\mathbb{R}}$ is therefore compact. While this is nice from an analytic standpoint, extending the reals in this way can allow for interesting arithmetic! In $\overline{\mathbb{R}}$ it is perfectly OK to say that,
\begin{align*}
a + \infty = \infty + a & = \infty, & a & \neq -\infty \\
a - \infty = -\infty + a & = -\infty, & a & \neq \infty \\
a \cdot (\pm\infty) = \pm\infty \cdot a & = \pm\infty, & a & \in (0, +\infty] \\
a \cdot (\pm\infty) = \pm\infty \cdot a & = \mp\infty, & a & \in [-\infty, 0) \\
\frac{a}{\pm\infty} & = 0, & a & \in \mathbb{R} \\
\frac{\pm\infty}{a} & = \pm\infty, & a & \in (0, +\infty) \\
\frac{\pm\infty}{a} & = \mp\infty, & a & \in (-\infty, 0).
\end{align*}So addition, multiplication, and division are all defined nicely. However, notice that we have some indeterminate forms here which are also undefined,
\[\infty-\infty,\frac{\pm\infty}{\pm\infty},\frac{\pm\infty}{0},0\cdot \pm\infty.\]So while we define certain things, we also left others undefined/indeterminate in the process! However, in the context of measure theory it is common to define $\infty \times 0=0$ as greenturtle3141 noted below. I encourage to reread what he wrote, it's great stuff! As you may notice, though, dividing by $0$ is undefined still! Is there a place where it isn't? Kind of. To do this, we can extend the complex numbers! More formally, we can define this extension as
\[\mathbb{C}^*=\mathbb{C}\cup\{\tilde{\infty}\}\]which we call the Riemann Sphere (it actually forms a sphere, pretty cool right?). As a note, $\tilde{\infty}$ means complex infinity, since we are in the complex plane now. Here's the catch: division by $0$ is allowed here! In fact, we have
\[\frac{z}{0}=\tilde{\infty},\frac{z}{\tilde{\infty}}=0.\]where $\tilde{\infty}/\tilde{\infty}$ and $0/0$ are left undefined. We also have
\begin{align*}
z+\tilde{\infty}=\tilde{\infty}, \forall z\ne -\infty\\
z\times \tilde{\infty}=\tilde{\infty}, \forall z\ne 0
\end{align*}Furthermore, we actually have some nice properties with multiplication that we didn't have before. In $\mathbb{C}^*$ it holds that
\[\tilde{\infty}\times \tilde{\infty}=\tilde{\infty}\]but $\tilde{\infty}-\tilde{\infty}$ and $0\times \tilde{\infty}$ are left as undefined (unless there is an explicit need to change that somehow). One could define the projectively extended reals as we did with $\mathbb{C}^*$, by defining them as
\[{\widehat {\mathbb {R} }}=\mathbb {R} \cup \{\infty \}.\]They behave in a similar way to the Riemann Sphere, with division by $0$ also being allowed with the same indeterminate forms (in addition to some other ones).
23 replies
Arr0w
Feb 11, 2022
scannose
Sep 19, 2022
k i Marathon Threads
LauraZed   0
Jul 2, 2019
Due to excessive spam and inappropriate posts, we have locked the Prealgebra and Beginning Algebra threads.

We will either unlock these threads once we've cleaned them up or start new ones, but for now, do not start new marathon threads for these subjects. Any new marathon threads started while this announcement is up will be immediately deleted.
0 replies
LauraZed
Jul 2, 2019
0 replies
k i Basic Forum Rules and Info (Read before posting)
jellymoop   368
N May 16, 2018 by harry1234
f (Reminder: Do not post Alcumus or class homework questions on this forum. Instructions below.) f
Welcome to the Middle School Math Forum! Please take a moment to familiarize yourself with the rules.

Overview:
[list]
[*] When you're posting a new topic with a math problem, give the topic a detailed title that includes the subject of the problem (not just "easy problem" or "nice problem")
[*] Stay on topic and be courteous.
[*] Hide solutions!
[*] If you see an inappropriate post in this forum, simply report the post and a moderator will deal with it. Don't make your own post telling people they're not following the rules - that usually just makes the issue worse.
[*] When you post a question that you need help solving, post what you've attempted so far and not just the question. We are here to learn from each other, not to do your homework. :P
[*] Avoid making posts just to thank someone - you can use the upvote function instead
[*] Don't make a new reply just to repeat yourself or comment on the quality of others' posts; instead, post when you have a new insight or question. You can also edit your post if it's the most recent and you want to add more information.
[*] Avoid bumping old posts.
[*] Use GameBot to post alcumus questions.
[*] If you need general MATHCOUNTS/math competition advice, check out the threads below.
[*] Don't post other users' real names.
[*] Advertisements are not allowed. You can advertise your forum on your profile with a link, on your blog, and on user-created forums that permit forum advertisements.
[/list]

Here are links to more detailed versions of the rules. These are from the older forums, so you can overlook "Classroom math/Competition math only" instructions.
Posting Guidelines
Update on Basic Forum Rules
What belongs on this forum?
How do I write a thorough solution?
How do I get a problem on the contest page?
How do I study for mathcounts?
Mathcounts FAQ and resources
Mathcounts and how to learn

As always, if you have any questions, you can PM me or any of the other Middle School Moderators. Once again, if you see spam, it would help a lot if you filed a report instead of responding :)

Marathons!
Relays might be a better way to describe it, but these threads definitely go the distance! One person starts off by posting a problem, and the next person comes up with a solution and a new problem for another user to solve. Here's some of the frequently active marathons running in this forum:
[list][*]Algebra
[*]Prealgebra
[*]Proofs
[*]Factoring
[*]Geometry
[*]Counting & Probability
[*]Number Theory[/list]
Some of these haven't received attention in a while, but these are the main ones for their respective subjects. Rather than starting a new marathon, please give the existing ones a shot first.

You can also view marathons via the Marathon tag.

Think this list is incomplete or needs changes? Let the mods know and we'll take a look.
368 replies
jellymoop
May 8, 2015
harry1234
May 16, 2018
Polynomial approximation and intersections
egxa   1
N 2 minutes ago by MathLuis
Source: All Russian 2025 10.6
What is the smallest value of \( k \) such that for any polynomial \( f(x) \) of degree $100$ with real coefficients, there exists a polynomial \( g(x) \) of degree at most \( k \) with real coefficients such that the graphs of \( y = f(x) \) and \( y = g(x) \) intersect at exactly $100$ points?
1 reply
egxa
Yesterday at 5:11 PM
MathLuis
2 minutes ago
another problem
kjhgyuio   1
N 10 minutes ago by eric201291
.........
1 reply
kjhgyuio
31 minutes ago
eric201291
10 minutes ago
pqr/uvw convert
Nguyenhuyen_AG   0
11 minutes ago
Source: https://github.com/nguyenhuyenag/pqr_convert
Hi everyone,
As we know, the pqr/uvw method is a powerful and useful tool for proving inequalities. However, transforming an expression $f(a,b,c)$ into $f(p,q,r)$ or $f(u,v,w)$ can sometimes be quite complex. That's why I’ve written a program to assist with this process.
I hope you’ll find it helpful!

Download: pqr_convert

Screenshot:
IMAGE
IMAGE
0 replies
Nguyenhuyen_AG
11 minutes ago
0 replies
Inspired by old results
sqing   1
N an hour ago by sqing
Source: Own
Let $ a,b>0. $ Prove that
$$\frac{(a+1)^2}{b}+\frac{(b+k)^2}{a} \geq4(k+1) $$Where $ k\geq 0. $
$$\frac{a^2}{b}+\frac{(b+1)^2}{a} \geq4$$
1 reply
sqing
an hour ago
sqing
an hour ago
Website to learn math
hawa   32
N 2 hours ago by thinkcraze
Hi, I'm kinda curious what website do yall use to learn math, like i dont find any website thats fun to learn math
32 replies
hawa
Apr 9, 2025
thinkcraze
2 hours ago
The daily problem!
Leeoz   113
N 3 hours ago by valenbb
Every day, I will try to post a new problem for you all to solve! If you want to post a daily problem, you can! :)

Please hide solutions and answers, hints are fine though! :)

Problems usually get harder throughout the week, so Sunday is the easiest and Saturday is the hardest!

Past Problems!
113 replies
Leeoz
Mar 21, 2025
valenbb
3 hours ago
300 MAP Goal??
Antoinette14   62
N 3 hours ago by EthanNg6
Hey, so as a 6th grader, my big goal for MAP this spring is to get a 300 (ambitious, i know). I'm currently at a 285 (288 last year though). I'm already taking a intro to counting and probability course (One of my weak points), but is there anything else you recommend I focus on to get a 300?
62 replies
Antoinette14
Jan 30, 2025
EthanNg6
3 hours ago
k 100 post!
JohannIsBach   13
N 4 hours ago by EthanNg6
this is my 100th post! i cant believe it. :wow:
P.S. can everyone who reads this give it an upvote? thx!
13 replies
JohannIsBach
Mar 10, 2025
EthanNg6
4 hours ago
0!??????
wizwilzo   50
N Yesterday at 6:45 PM by wipid98
why is 0! "1" ??!
50 replies
wizwilzo
Jul 6, 2016
wipid98
Yesterday at 6:45 PM
An algebra math problem
AVY2024   6
N Yesterday at 6:03 PM by Roger.Moore
Solve for a,b
ax-2b=5bx-3a
6 replies
AVY2024
Apr 8, 2025
Roger.Moore
Yesterday at 6:03 PM
easy olympiad problem
kjhgyuio   5
N Yesterday at 6:01 PM by Roger.Moore
Find all positive integer values of \( x \) such that
\[
\sqrt{x - 2011} + \sqrt{2011 - x} + 10
\]is an integer.
5 replies
kjhgyuio
Thursday at 2:00 PM
Roger.Moore
Yesterday at 6:01 PM
Mathcounts Nationals Roommate Search
iwillregretthisnamelater   37
N Yesterday at 6:00 PM by MathWinner121
Does anybody want to be my roommate at nats? Every other qualifier in my state is female. :sob:
Respond quick pls i gotta submit it in like a couple of hours.
37 replies
iwillregretthisnamelater
Mar 31, 2025
MathWinner121
Yesterday at 6:00 PM
EaZ_Shadow
Apr 6, 2025
derekwang2048
Yesterday at 5:26 PM
Math and AI 4 Girls
mkwhe   20
N Yesterday at 3:58 PM by fishchips
Hey everyone!

The 2025 MA4G competition is now open!

Apply Here: https://xmathandai4girls.submittable.com/submit


Visit https://www.mathandai4girls.org/ to get started!

Feel free to PM or email mathandai4girls@yahoo.com if you have any questions!
20 replies
mkwhe
Apr 5, 2025
fishchips
Yesterday at 3:58 PM
IMO ShortList 1999, number theory problem 1
orl   61
N Apr 6, 2025 by cursed_tangent1434
Source: IMO ShortList 1999, number theory problem 1
Find all the pairs of positive integers $(x,p)$ such that p is a prime, $x \leq 2p$ and $x^{p-1}$ is a divisor of $ (p-1)^{x}+1$.
61 replies
orl
Nov 13, 2004
cursed_tangent1434
Apr 6, 2025
IMO ShortList 1999, number theory problem 1
G H J
Source: IMO ShortList 1999, number theory problem 1
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
Shreyasharma
678 posts
#50 • 1 Y
Y by cubres
Long solution with unnecessary claims (probably), though very quick and easy to find.

We can see $x = 1$ works for all primes $p$ so disregard this case from now on.

Note that we want,
\begin{align*}
(p-1)^x \equiv - 1 \pmod{x^{p-1}}
\end{align*}Consider the smallest prime $q \mid x$. Then we have,
\begin{align*}
(p-1)^{2x} \equiv 1 \pmod{q}
\end{align*}Then $\text{ord}_{q}(p-1) \mid \gcd(2x, q - 1) = 2$. Assume that $\text{ord}_{q}(p-1) = 1$. Then we find that $p \equiv 2 \pmod{q}$. However then we require that $(p-1)^x + 1 \equiv 2 \equiv 0 \pmod{q}$ implying $q = 2$. Then plugging back in we wish to find solutions to $x \mid 2$ so $x = 2$ works.

Now in our second case we must have $\text{ord}_{q}(p-1)  = 2$. Then we have,
\begin{align*}
p^2 - 2p &\equiv 0 \pmod{q}\\
\iff p(p - 2) &\equiv 0 \pmod{q}
\end{align*}Then as we have alread considered $p \equiv 2$, we need $p \equiv 0 \pmod{q}$. However as $p$ is prime we need $p = q$ and hence $p$ is the smallest prime divisor of $x$. Now note LTE we have $\nu_p((p-1)^x + 1) = 1 + \nu_p(x)$. Also we easily find that $\nu_p(x^{p-1}) = \nu_p(x) \cdot (p-1)$. Then we obviously need,
\begin{align*}
1 + \nu_p(x) &\geq  (p-1) \cdot \nu_p(x) \\
\iff 1 &\geq (p-2) \cdot \nu_p(x)
\end{align*}Which holds if and only if $\nu_p(x) = 0$, $p = 2$ or $p = 3$ and $\nu_3(x) \leq 1$. If $\nu_p(x) = 0$, then $x = 1$ as $p$ is the smallest prime divisor of $x$. Then if $p = 2$ we must have $x \mid 2$ which holds if and only if $x = 2$. Finally if $p = 3$ and $\nu_3(x) = 1$ we have $x^2 \mid 2^x + 1$. However from 90IMO3 and orders argument gives that this has solutions only when $x = 3$.

Then our final solution set is $\boxed{\{(1, p), (2, 2), (3, 3)\}}$.
This post has been edited 1 time. Last edited by Shreyasharma, Dec 28, 2023, 4:37 AM
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
Cali.Math
128 posts
#51 • 1 Y
Y by cubres
We uploaded our solution https://calimath.org/pdf/IMO1999-4.pdf on youtube https://youtu.be/DtVQP4OXVCw.
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
lelouchvigeo
179 posts
#52 • 1 Y
Y by cubres
If $x = 1$, then all $p$ work.
For $p=2$, then $x$ is $1$ or $2$. Assume now $p\ge 3$.
Let $x>1$, then let the samllest prime factor of x be q.
We have $(p-1)^{2x} \equiv 1 \pmod{q}$. This implies $ q-1 \mid 2x$. This forces $q=2.$
Now since $v_2(2x^{p-1}) > v_2(p-1)^x +1) $, the only case to be checked now is $x=p$
$p^{p-1} \mid (p-1)^p + 1 \implies p-1 \le \nu_p((p-1)^p + 1)   $ $ \implies p-1 \le 2 \implies p\le3$
Now checking for $p=3$. We get a solution as $(3,3)$
Therefore the solutions are $\boxed{(1, p), (2, 2), (3, 3)}$
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
AlanLG
241 posts
#53 • 1 Y
Y by cubres
:coolspeak:
Solution without the bound of $x$
If $p=2$, then $x=2$, so for now assume $p\geq 3$
If $x=1$ all $p$ primes work, so also assume $x\geq 2$

Let $q$ be the smallest prime dividing $x$ then $(p-1)^{2x}\equiv 1\pmod q$ and as $(p-1)^{q-1}\equiv 1\pmod q$ then $\operatorname{Ord}_q(p-1)\mid 2\gcd\left(x,\frac{p-1}{2}\right)=2$ so $(p-1)^2\equiv 1\pmod q$ so $p=q$ or $p\equiv 2\pmod q$, the latter gives $(p-1)^x+1\equiv 2\pmod q$ impossible. If $p=q$ then, by Lifting the Exponent $$\nu_p((p-1)^x+1)=\nu_p(p)+v_p(x)\geq (p-1)\nu_p(x)$$so $1\geq (p-2)v_p(x)\geq (p-2)\cdot 1$ so $p=3$
which gives to find all integers $x$ such that $x^2\mid 2^x+1$ which by IMO 1990/3 only $x=3$ works so the solutions are $\boxed{(x,p)=(1,p),(2,2), (3,3)}$
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
joshualiu315
2513 posts
#54 • 1 Y
Y by cubres
I was given no condition bounding $x$:


The solution set is $(x,p) \in \{(1,p), (2,2), (3,3)\}$.

Note that if $x=1$, all $p$ work. Also, if $p=2$, we must have $x \mid 2$, which gives the unique solution $(x,p)=(2,2)$. Assume $x>1$ and $p>2$ for the remainder of this solution.

Let $q$ be the smallest prime dividing $x$. We have

\[\operatorname{ord}_q(p-1) \mid \gcd(2x,q-1) = 2.\]
Hence,

\[(p-1)^2 \equiv 1 \pmod{q} \iff p(p-2) \equiv 0 \pmod{q}.\]
Hence, $p \equiv 0,2 \pmod{q}$. The latter gives

\[(p-1)^x+1 \equiv 2 \pmod{q},\]
implying that $q=2$. However, $(p-1)^x+1$ is odd, so this yields a contradiction.

Otherwise, we have $p \equiv 0 \pmod{q} \iff p=q$, so LTE gives

\[\nu_p((p-1)^x+1) = \nu_p(p)+\nu_p(x) \ge \nu_p(x^{p-1}) = (p-1) \nu_p(x)\]\[\implies 1+\nu_p(x) \ge (p-1) \nu_p(x) \iff (p-2) \nu_p(x) \le 1.\]
Since $\nu_p(x) \ge 1$, we must have $p=3$.

The problem is now reduced to finding all $x$ such that $x^2 \mid 2^x+1$.


Lemma The only value $x$ satisfying this is $x=3$.

Proof: Consider IMO 1990/3. $\square$


Hence, the unique solution here is $(x,p)=(3,3)$. This completes our solution set.
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
shendrew7
793 posts
#55 • 1 Y
Y by cubres
The condition $x \leq 2p$ turns out to be unnecessary. Our solutions are $\boxed{(1,p),(2,2),(3,3)}$. We proceed first by tackling edge cases:
  • If $x=1$, $p$ can be any prime.
  • If $p=2$, $x$ is either 1 or 2.
  • Otherwise, $p$ is odd, forcing $x$ to be odd. Then we require
    \[(p-1) \cdot v_p(x) \leq v_p((p-1)^x+1) = v_p(x) + 1 \implies (p-2) \cdot v_p(x) \leq 1.\]If $p=3$, IMO 1990/3 tells us $x$ is either 1 or 3.
  • Otherwise, $\gcd(x,p)=1$. Suppose the least prime divisor of $x$ is $q>2$. Then
    \[\operatorname{ord}_q(p-1) \mid 2n, p-1 \text{ but not } n \implies \operatorname{ord}_q(p-1) = 2 \implies p=q,\]contradiction. $\blacksquare$
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
SenorSloth
37 posts
#56 • 1 Y
Y by cubres
We claim that the only such pairs are $(2,2)$, $(3,3)$, and $(1,p)$ for any prime $p$.
(This proof assumes there is no bound on $x$.)

We start with the trivial case when $p=2$. We end up with $x\mid 2$, which clearly gives only $x=1$ and $x=2$ as solutions.

For odd primes, we know that $(p-1)^x+1$ is odd, and thus $x$ must be odd. For any $p$, $x=1$ clearly works since $1$ divides everything. Assuming $x\neq 1$, we let $q$ be the smallest prime divisor of $x$. We know that the order of $p-1\pmod{q}$ divides $\gcd(q-1,2x)$. Since $x$ only has prime factors at least $q$, it is clear $x$ and $q-1$ are relatively prime and thus $\gcd(q-1,2x)$ must be exactly $2$. The order cannot be $1$, because in that case $q\mid (p-1)^x-1$, not $(p-1)^x+1$, so the order must be $2$. This implies that $p-1\equiv -1\pmod{q}$, so $p\equiv 0\pmod{q}$ and thus $p=q$.

Now we use LTE to rule out all cases except $p=3$. We know that $\nu_p((p-1)-(-1))=1$, so $\nu_p((p-1)^x-(-1)^x)=1+\nu_p(x)$. We also have that $\nu_p(x^{p-1})=(p-1)\nu_p(x)$. Note that since $p=q$, we have $p\mid x$. This means that for $p>3$, $(p-1)\nu_p(x)>1+\nu_p(x)$, so there are no solutions. For $p=3$, if $\nu_3(x)=1$ then they have equal values, so this case has to be resolved separately.

We can check to see that $(3,3)$ is a solution. Now we have to rule out other solutions. Our previous bound showed that $\nu_3(x)=1$ was the only one possible. Let $r$ be the minimum other prime that is a factor of $x$. Then the order of $2\pmod{r}$ divides $\gcd(r-1,2x)$. Similar to before, other than a factor each of $2$ and $3$, $2x$ only contains prime factors greater than $r$, and thus the order must divide $6$. Furthermore, the order being $1$ or $3$ won't work, so it must be $2$ or $6$. However, $3$ is the only working prime for order $2$, while no primes exist for order $6$ since $2^6-1=63$ but $7$ has order $3$ since $2^3-1=7$. Thus, there can be no other prime factors, and we are done.
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
de-Kirschbaum
193 posts
#57 • 1 Y
Y by cubres
Note that when $x=1$ every prime works so we will only consider the cases where $x \neq 1$. Now note that for any prime factor $q \mid x$ we have $(p-1)^x \equiv -1 \mod{q}, (p-1)^{2x} \equiv 1 \mod{q}$ which means $\delta_{q}(p-1)=\gcd(2x, q-1)$ which is either $2$ or $1$ since $q-1$ is corpime with $x$. If it is $1$, then $(p-1)^x \equiv 1 \equiv -1 \mod{q} \implies q=2 \implies p=2$ in which case we have $(p-1)^x+1=2$ which is divisible only by $1,2$ so $(x,p)=(2,2)$ is the new solution.

If $\delta_q(p-1)=2$ then $p-1 \equiv -1 \mod{q} \implies p \equiv 0 \mod{q} \implies p=q$. Then that means $q \leq x \leq 2q$ but if $x=2q$ then that means $(p-1)^x+1$ has a prime factor where the order is 1, but we dealt with that in the previous case already. Thus $x=q=p$. Then we have $p^{p-1} \mid (p-1)^p+1$. By LTE we get that $\nu_p((p-1)^p+1)=\nu_p(p)+\nu_p(p)=2$. Thus the division only holds when $p=2, 3$, but we dealt with the case when $p=2$ already so we check the solutions for $p=3$ which gives us a new solution $(x,p)=(3,3)$, and if $p \geq 5$ clearly there are no solutions as the division no longer holds.

Thus the solutions are $(x,p)=(1,p),(2,2),(3,3)$.
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
BestAOPS
707 posts
#58 • 1 Y
Y by cubres
We claim the solutions are $(1,p)$ for all $p$, $(2,2)$, and $(3,3)$. They can be checked to work. Furthermore, if $p=2$, then $x$ must be a divisor of $1^x + 1 = 2$, so $(1,2)$ and $(2,2)$ are the only solutions. Thus, from now on, we can assume $x > 1$ and $p \geq 3$.

We know $x$ has a least prime factor; let that be $q$. Then, we have
\begin{align*}
    (p-1)^x \equiv -1 \pmod{q} \\
    (p-1)^{2x} \equiv 1 \pmod{q}.
\end{align*}Looking at the order of $(p-1)^2$, it must divide the GCD of $q-1$ and $x$. But $q$ being the least prime factor implies that GCD is $1$, so $(p-1)^2 \equiv 1 \pmod{q}$. This means $q \mid p(p-2)$.

However, $q \mid p-2$ is impossible. To see why, notice that $(p-1)^x + 1 \equiv 1 + 1 \pmod{p-2}$, so $(p-1)^x + 1 \equiv 2 \pmod{q}$. Since $q$ is odd, this means that $(p-1)^x + 1$ is not divisible by $q$, contradicting the fact that $x^{p-1}$ divides $(p-1)^x + 1$.

Thus, we must have $q = p$. Now, notice that since $x$ must be odd, we can use lifting the exponent:
\[ \nu_p((p-1)^x + 1) = 1 + \nu_p(x) \geq \nu_p(x^{p-1}) = (p-1)\nu_p(x). \]This implies
\[ \frac{1}{p-2} \geq \nu_p(x) \geq 1, \]so $p \leq 3$.

We only need to consider the case where $p = 3$. However, the result of IMO 1990/3 tells us that $(1,3)$ and $(3,3)$ are the only solutions in this case, so we are done.
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
ezpotd
1253 posts
#59 • 1 Y
Y by cubres
The answer is only $(3,3), (2,2)$ and $(1,p)$ for all primes $p$. It is easy to verify these work.

Main idea is to consider the lowest prime divisor of $x$ (ignore $x =1$ as it always works, ignore $p < 4$ as it can be done manually), let it be $q$. Then take $\mathrm{ord}_q p - 1 \mid  q - 1, \mathrm{ord}_q p - 1 \mid 2x$, so $\mathrm{ord}_q p -1 = 1,2$. In the first case, we have $q = p - 2$, so for $p > 3$ we can check that $x = q$ by size, so we can eliminate this case by just showing $q^{p - 1} > p^{q } + 1$, by mod $p$ they are clearly never equal so we can just show $q^{p - 1} > p^{q }$ which forces no sol, since $(q + 1)^{p- 1} = (p - 1)^{q + 1}$, it suffices to show that $(\frac{q}{q + 1})^{p - 1} \ge \frac{1}{p - 1}$, rewrite as $(1 - \frac{1}{c})^{c} \ge \frac 1c$, which is obvious for $c > 4$ since the left is increasing in $c$ and the right is decreasing , in the latter we have $q = p$, so we can use LTE, check $p = 2$ manually then LTE on odd case gives $\nu_p$ on the right is $2$, on left is $p - 1$, so we must have $p \le 3$, giving the only solution as $p = 3$.
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
pie854
243 posts
#60 • 1 Y
Y by cubres
Note that $(1,p)$ works for any prime $p$ and $(2,2)$ also works for any $x$. So let us assume $x>1$ and $p>2$.

We have $x^{p-1}\mid (p-1)^{2x}-1$. Let $q$ be a prime such that $q\mid x$. Let $\alpha=\text{ord}_q({p-1})\leq q-1$ then $q\mid (p-1)^\alpha-1$ and $\alpha\mid 2x$. So by LTE \begin{align*} v_q\left((p-1)^{2x}-1\right)\geq v_q(x^{p-1}) & \Rightarrow v_q\left((p-1)^\alpha-1\right)+v_q(2x/\alpha) \geq (p-1)v_q(x) \\ & \Rightarrow v_q\left((p-1)^\alpha-1\right)\geq (p-2)v_q(x) \\ & \Rightarrow q^{p-2} \mid (p-1)^\alpha-1 \\ & \Rightarrow q^{p-2} <(p-1)^\alpha\leq (p-1)^{q-1}.\end{align*}From this it's not very hard to show that $q\geq p$. So if $x=qk\leq 2p$ then either $k=2,q=p$ or $k=1$. If $x=2p$ then by mod 2 we get a contradiction. If $x=q$ then by FLT $$0\equiv (p-1)^q+1 \equiv (p-1)+1 \equiv p \pmod q,$$so $q=p$. Using LTE again $$p-1\leq v_p\left((p-1)^p+1\right)=v_p(p-1+1)+v_p(p)=2,$$so $p=3$. Checking we find that the other working pair is $(3,3)$.
This post has been edited 3 times. Last edited by pie854, Sep 28, 2024, 1:20 PM
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
alexanderhamilton124
388 posts
#61 • 2 Y
Y by ubermensch, cubres
$x = 1$ and any prime work, and if $p = 2$, then $x = 2$, so assume $x \neq 1$, and $p$ is odd. Clearly, $(p - 1)^x + 1$ is odd, so $x$ must be odd as well. Consider the smallest prime divisor, $q$ (which is odd), of $x$, then $q \mid (p - 1)^x + 1 \implies (p - 1)^{2x} \equiv 1\mod{q} \implies \text{ord}_q(p - 1) \mid \gcd(2x, q - 1) = 2$. Note that $\text{ord}_q(p - 1) \neq 1 \implies \text{ord}_q(p - 1) = 2 \implies q \mid p - 1 + 1 = p \implies q = p$. So, $p \mid x$.

We have $(p - 1)v_p(x) \leq v_p((p - 1)^x + 1) = 1 + v_p(x)$, and since $v_p(x) = 1$, $p - 1 \leq 2 \implies p = 3$. Just checking gives only $x = 3$ works, so we are done.
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
eibc
600 posts
#63 • 1 Y
Y by cubres
The only answers are $(x, p) = (2, 2), (3, 3)$, and $(1, p)$ for any prime $p$. It's easy to verify all of these solutions work, so now we show they are the only ones.

When $p = 2$, we have $x \mid 2$, so $x = 1$, or $x = 2$.

When $p = 3$, by IMO 1990/3, the only answers are $(x, p) = (1, 3)$ and $(3, 3)$.

When $p > 3$, if $x = 1$ then evidently $x^{p-1} \mid (p-1)^{x}+1$. If $x > 1$, suppose $q$ is the smallest prime factor of $x$. Note that $(p - 1)^x + 1$ is odd, so $q > 2$. Since $(p - 1)^x \equiv -1 \pmod p$, we find that $(p - 1)^{2x} \equiv 1 \pmod q$ so $\text{ord}_q(p - 1) \mid 2x$. Because $\text{ord}_q(p - 1) \le q - 1$, we must have $\text{ord}_q(p - 1) \in \{1, 2\}$.

If $\text{ord}_q(p - 1) = 1$ then $p - 1 \equiv 1 \pmod q$. Thus $0 \equiv (p - 1)^x + 1 \equiv 2 \pmod q$, so $q = 2$, which is impossible.

If $\text{ord}_q(p - 1) = 2$ then $p - 1 \equiv -1 \pmod q$, or $p \equiv 0 \pmod q$, so $p = q$. Then from LTE, we find that
$$(p - 1)\nu_p(x) = \nu_p(x^{p - 1}) \le \nu_p((p - 1)^x + 1) = \nu_p(p) + \nu_p(x) = 1 + \nu_p(x).$$However, because $p > 3$ and $\nu_p(x) > 1$, this is impossible. So, we are done.
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
smileapple
1010 posts
#64 • 1 Y
Y by cubres
If $p\ge3$, note that $x$ must be odd. Then $\nu_p(x^{p-1})=(p-1)\nu_p(x)$ and $\nu_p((p-1)^x+1)=\nu_p(p)+\nu_p(x)=\nu_p(x)+1$. Hence $(p-2)\nu_p(x)\le1$, so that either $p=3$ or $\nu_p(x)=0$. In the first case, by 90IMO3 the only solutions are $(x,p)=(1,3)$ and $(x,p)=(3,3)$.

Otherwise, Let $q$ be the minimal prime divisor of $x$. We have $(p-1)^{2x}\equiv1\pmod q$ and $(p-1)^{(q-1)}\equiv1\pmod q$, so that $(p-1)^2\equiv(p-1)^{\gcd(2x,q-1)}\equiv1\pmod q$, so that $p\equiv2\pmod q$. But then $(p-1)^x+1\equiv2\pmod q$ and $x^{p-1}\equiv0\pmod q$, which is a contradiction as $p$ is odd. Thus $q$ cannot exist, so that $x=1$.

If $p=2$ then $x=1$ or $x=2$ both work.

Our solution set is thus $\boxed{\{(2,2),(3,3)\}\cup\{(1,p)\mid p\in\mathbb{P}\}}$.
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
cursed_tangent1434
589 posts
#65
Y by
We claim that the only pairs of solutions $(x,p)$ are $(1,p)$ for any prime $p$, $(2,2)$ and $(3,3)$. It is easy to check that all of these indeed work. We now show that they are the only ones.

First note that, if $p=2$ the resulting condition is $x \mid 2$ which is only possible if $x=1$ or $x=2$. If $p$ is odd, the right hand side is clearly odd as well, so $x$ must be odd. Further, if $x=1$ then it is clear that $p$ can be an arbitrary prime. Thus, in what follows we assume that $x>1$ is even and that $p$ is an odd prime. We first show the following claim.

Claim : For all pairs of solutions $(x,p)$ we must have $p \mid x$.

Proof : Let $q$ denote the smallest prime divisor of $x$. Then,
\[q\mid x^{p-1} \mid (p-1)^x +1 \]implies $(p-1)^{2x} \equiv 1 \pmod{q}$. Thus, $\text{ord}_{q}(p-1) \mid 2x$. Also, $\text{ord}_{q}(p-1) \mid q-1$. But then, if there exists an odd prime divisor $r \mid \text{ord}_q(p-1)$ then $r \mid 2x$ so $r\mid x$ and also $r \mid q-1$. Thus, $r \le q-1 <q$ which contradicts the minimality of $q$. Thus, $\text{ord}_{q}(p-1)$ is a perfect power of two. However, since $x$ is odd $\nu_2(2x)=1$ so $\text{ord}_{q}(p-1)=2$. This means, $(p-1)^2 \equiv 1 \pmod{q}$ and thus,
\[0 \equiv (p-1)^x +1 \equiv (p-1)+1 \equiv p \pmod{q}\]which is possible if and only if $p=q$ as desired.

Now note that by Lifting the Exponent Lemma we have,
\[(p-1)\nu_p(x) = \nu_p(x^{p-1}) \le \nu_p((p-1)^x+1) =\nu_p(p)+\nu_p(x)=\nu_p(x)+1 \]However, if $p>3$,
\[(p-1)\nu_p(x) > 2\nu_p(x) \ge \nu_p(x)+1\]which is a clear contradiction. Thus, we must have $p=3$ which reduces the desired divisibility to
\[x^2 \mid 2^x +1\]whose solutions are known to be $x=1$ and $x=3$ by IMO 1990/3 which finishes the proof.
Z K Y
N Quick Reply
G
H
=
a