Difference between revisions of "1987 IMO Problems/Problem 6"
(creation) |
m (→Solution) |
||
(2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
==Solution== | ==Solution== | ||
− | {{ | + | First observe that if <math>m</math> is relatively prime to <math>b+1</math>, <math>b+2</math>, <math>\cdots</math>, <math>2b</math>, then <math>m</math> is relatively prime to any number less than <math>2b</math>. Since if <math>c\leq b</math>, then we can choose some <math>i</math> to make <math>2^ic</math> lies in range <math>b+1,b+2,\cdots,2b</math>, so <math>2^ic</math> is relatively prime to <math>m</math>. Hence <math>c</math> is also. If we also have <math>(2b+1)^2>m</math>, then we can conclude that <math>m</math> is a prime. Since there must be a factor of <math>m</math> less than <math>\sqrt{m}</math>. |
+ | |||
+ | Let <math>n=3r^2+h</math> where <math>0\leq h<6r+3</math>, so <math>r</math> is the greatest integer less than or equal to <math>\sqrt{n/3}</math>.(to see this, just let <math>r=\lfloor\sqrt{n/3}\rfloor</math>, then we can write <math>n=3(r+\epsilon)^2(0\leq\epsilon< 1)</math>, so <math>h=6r\epsilon+3\epsilon^2\leq 6r+3</math>). | ||
+ | |||
+ | Assume that <math>n+k(k+1)</math> is prime for <math>k=1,2,3\cdots,r</math>. We show that <math>N=n+(r+s)(r+s+1)</math> is prime for <math>s=0,1,2,\cdots,n-r-2</math>. By our observation above, it is sufficient to show that <math>(2s+2r+t)^2>N</math> and <math>N</math> is relatively prime to all of <math>r+s+1,r+s+2,\cdots,2r+2s</math>. We have <math>(2r+2s+1)^2=4r^2+4s^2+8rs+4r+4s+1</math>. Since <math>s,t\ge1</math>, we have <math>4s+1>s+2</math>, <math>4s^2>s^2</math> and <math>6rs>3r</math>. Hence <cmath>(2s+2r+1)^2>4r^2+2rs+s^2+7r+s+2=3r^2+6r+2+(r+s)(r+s+1)\ge N</cmath> | ||
+ | Now if <math>N</math> has a factor which divides <math>2r-i</math> in the range <math>-2s</math> to <math>r-s-1</math>, then so does <math>N-(i+2s+1)(2r-i)=n+(r-i-s-1)(r-i-s)</math> which have the form <math>n+s'(s'+1)</math> with <math>s'</math> in range <math>0</math> to <math>r</math>. | ||
{{IMO box|num-b=5|after=Last question|year=1987}} | {{IMO box|num-b=5|after=Last question|year=1987}} | ||
− | |||
[[Category:Olympiad Number Theory Problems]] | [[Category:Olympiad Number Theory Problems]] |
Latest revision as of 12:03, 24 February 2024
Problem
Let be an integer greater than or equal to 2. Prove that if is prime for all integers such that , then is prime for all integers such that .
Solution
First observe that if is relatively prime to , , , , then is relatively prime to any number less than . Since if , then we can choose some to make lies in range , so is relatively prime to . Hence is also. If we also have , then we can conclude that is a prime. Since there must be a factor of less than .
Let where , so is the greatest integer less than or equal to .(to see this, just let , then we can write , so ).
Assume that is prime for . We show that is prime for . By our observation above, it is sufficient to show that and is relatively prime to all of . We have . Since , we have , and . Hence Now if has a factor which divides in the range to , then so does which have the form with in range to .
1987 IMO (Problems) • Resources | ||
Preceded by Problem 5 |
1 • 2 • 3 • 4 • 5 • 6 | Followed by Last question |
All IMO Problems and Solutions |