Difference between revisions of "Chicken McNugget Theorem"
Chickendude (talk | contribs) (Added proof. Needs some formatting.) |
m |
||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
Proof: | Proof: | ||
Each member of the residue class can be written as | Each member of the residue class can be written as | ||
− | <math>am + r</math> for an integer <math>a</math>. Since <math>r</math> is in the form <math>bn</math>, this can be rewritten as <math>am + | + | <math>am + r</math> for an integer <math>a</math>. Since <math>r</math> is in the form <math>bn</math>, this can be rewritten as <math>am + bn</math>. |
Nonnegative values of <math>a</math> correspond to members greater than or equal to <math>r</math>. Negative values of <math>a</math> correspond to members less than <math>r</math>. Thus the lemma is proven. | Nonnegative values of <math>a</math> correspond to members greater than or equal to <math>r</math>. Negative values of <math>a</math> correspond to members less than <math>r</math>. Thus the lemma is proven. | ||
Revision as of 21:11, 22 July 2008
The Chicken McNugget Theorem states that for any two relatively prime positive integers , the greatest integer that cannot be written in the form
for nonnegative integers
is
.
Proof
Consider the integers . Let
. Note that since
and
are relatively prime,
is a Complete residue system in modulo
.
Lemma:
For any given residue class , call
the member of
in this class. All members greater than or equal to
can be written in the form
while all members less than
cannot for nonnegative
.
Proof:
Each member of the residue class can be written as
for an integer
. Since
is in the form
, this can be rewritten as
.
Nonnegative values of
correspond to members greater than or equal to
. Negative values of
correspond to members less than
. Thus the lemma is proven.
The largest member of is
, so the largest unattainable score
is in the same residue class as
.
The largest member of this residue class less than is
and the proof is complete.
See Also
This article is a stub. Help us out by expanding it.