Difference between revisions of "2015 USAMO Problems/Problem 5"
(→Solution) |
Alphabeta123 (talk | contribs) m (→Solution 1) |
||
(5 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
Let <math>a, b, c, d, e</math> be distinct positive integers such that <math>a^4 + b^4 = c^4 + d^4 = e^5</math>. Show that <math>ac + bd</math> is a composite number. | Let <math>a, b, c, d, e</math> be distinct positive integers such that <math>a^4 + b^4 = c^4 + d^4 = e^5</math>. Show that <math>ac + bd</math> is a composite number. | ||
− | ===Solution=== | + | ===Solution 1=== |
Note: This solution is definitely not what the folks at MAA intended, but it works! | Note: This solution is definitely not what the folks at MAA intended, but it works! | ||
Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
~BealsConjecture | ~BealsConjecture | ||
− | === | + | ===Solution 2=== |
A more conventional approach, using proof by contradiction: | A more conventional approach, using proof by contradiction: | ||
Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
Therefore, by contradiction, <math>ac+bd</math> is composite. | Therefore, by contradiction, <math>ac+bd</math> is composite. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===Solution 3=== |
Latest revision as of 11:45, 7 January 2025
Contents
[hide]Problem
Let be distinct positive integers such that
. Show that
is a composite number.
Solution 1
Note: This solution is definitely not what the folks at MAA intended, but it works!
Look at the statement . This can be viewed as a special case of Beal's Conjecture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beal%27s_conjecture), stating that the equation
has no solutions over positive integers for
and
. This special case was proven in 2009 by Michael Bennet, Jordan Ellenberg, and Nathan Ng, as
. This case
is obviously contained under that special case, so
and
must have a common factor greater than
.
Call the greatest common factor of and
. Then
for some
and likewise
for some
. Then consider the quantity
.
.
Because and
are both positive,
, and by definition
, so
is composite.
~BealsConjecture
Solution 2
A more conventional approach, using proof by contradiction:
Without loss of generality, assume
Since , It is obvious that
We construct the equation (the right side is the factorization of the left) Which factors into:
(by using
and factoring)
If or
equal zero, then
equals
or
respectively, which is impossible because
and because
are distinct. Therefore the right side of the equation above is non-zero and the left side must be divisible by
If were prime,
We have
Which means that and neither
nor
can be multiples of
meaning
must be a multiple of
and
for some integer
But clearly this is impossible since .
Therefore, by contradiction, is composite.