Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
18.781 Homework 2 Due: 18th February 2014 Q 1 (1.3(3)). Prove that a number is divisible by 2 if and only if the units digit is divisible by 2; that a number is divisible by 4 if and only if the integer formed by its tens and units digit is divisible by 4; that a number is divisible by 8 if and only if the the integer formed by the last three digits is divisible by 8. Pk Proof. Let the decimal expansion of a number n be i=0 ai 10i = a0 + 10a1 + 100a2 + . . . + 10k ak . Note Pk P P k k i i i that 10 | i=1 ai 10 , 100 | i=2 ai 10 , 1000 | i=3 ai 10 . These can be rewritten as n = a0 + 10k = a0 + 10a1 + 100l = a0 + 10a1 + 100a2 + 1000m for some integers k, l and m. As 2 | 10k, 2 | a0 if and only if 2 | n. As 4 | 100l, 4 | n if and only if 4 | a0 + 10a1 . As 8 | 1000m, 8 | n if and only if 8 | a0 + 10a1 + 100a2 . Q 2 (1.3(10)). Prove that any positive integer of the form 3k + 2 has a prime factor of the same form; similarly for each of the forms 4k + 3 and 6k + 5. Proof. Every number can be written as 3q + r for r ∈ {0, 1, 2} by the division algorithm. Any prime factor of a number of the form 3k + 2 which is not of the same form has to be of the form 3l + 1 as 3 - 3k + 2 for any k (the only prime of the form 3l is 3). A product of numbers of the form 3l + 1 is again a number of the same form (by looking at all products modulo 3, and using Theorem 2.1(4)). So the fundamental theorem of arithmetic along with the fact above tells us that a number of the form 3k + 2 must have a prime factor of the form 3k + 2. A prime factor of a number of the form 4k + 3 which is not of the same form has to be of the form 4l + 1 (2 - 4k + 3 for any k; any prime factor of a number of the form 4k + 3 has to be odd and therefore cannot be divisible by 4 or be congruent to 2 (mod 4)) and once again a product of numbers congruent to 1 (mod 4) is again congruent to 1 (mod 4). So the fundamental theorem of arithmetic along with this fact tell us that a number of the form 4k + 3 must have a prime factor of the same form. Note that both 3 and 2 do not divide a number of the form 6k + 5 = 2(3k + 2) + 1 = 3(2k + 1) + 2, so any prime factor of this number not of the same form should be of the form 6l + 1 (and cannot be of the form 6l or 6l + 2 or 6l + 3 or 6l + 4 as a number of any of these forms is either divisible by 2 or 3). A product of numbers of the form 6l + 1 is again a number of the same form (by looking at products modulo 6). So the the fundamental theorem of arithmetic now tells us that a number of the form 6k + 5 must have a prime factor of the same form. Q 3 (1.3(17)). Twin primes are those differing by 2. Show that 5 is the only prime belonging to two such pairs. Show also that there is a one-to-one correspondence between twin primes and numbers n such that n2 − 1 has just four positive divisors. Proof. 5 is clearly the smallest prime belonging to two such pairs (3, 5) and (5, 7). Let p ≥ 7 be a prime. p has to either be of the form 3k + 1 or 3k + 2 for some k ≥ 2. If p is of the form 3k + 1, then p + 2 = 3(k + 1) cannot be prime, and if p is of the form 3k + 2, then p − 2 = 3k cannot be prime. For p to belong two pairs of twin primes, both p − 2 and p + 2 must be prime and this isn’t possible for a prime p ≥ 7. Consider the pair (n − 1, n + 1). We claim that this gives us a pair of twin primes if and only if n2 − 1 has exactly four positive divisors. Assume first that n − 1 and n + 1 are both prime. Any prime divisor of n2 − 1 = (n − 1)(n + 1) has to divide either n − 1 or n + 1 and therefore has to equal one of them (as n − 1 and n + 1 are prime, and don’t have any proper divisors). Any prime factor of a proper divisor d of n2 − 1 is also a prime divisor of n2 − 1, so d = (n − 1)l or (n + 1)l. Now, if dd0 = n2 − 1, then we either have d0 l = n + 1 or d0 l = n − 1 (both n − 1 1 and n + 1 are prime and therefore not zero) but as n + 1 and n − 1 are prime, this forces l = 1 as d is a proper divisor of n2 − 1. So the four positive divisors of n2 − 1 are 1, n + 1, n − 1, n2 − 1. If n2 − 1 has only four positive divisors then the set of positive divisors is equal to {1, n − 1, n + 1, n2 − 1} (n > 1 as n = 1 forces n2 − 1 = 0 and it is no longer true that n2 − 1 has exactly four positive divisors. n > 1 implies both n − 1 and n + 1 are positive). This forces both n − 1 and n + 1 to be prime as any divisor of either of these numbers will also be a divisor of n2 − 1. This gives us the pair of twin primes (n − 1, n + 1). Q 4 (1.3(26)). Prove that there are infinitely many primes of the form 4n + 3 and of the form 6n + 5. Proof. Suppose there are only finitely many primes of the form 4n + 3, say {p1 , . . . , pk }. Let P denote their k ∼ 3k (mod 4) = 9 2 (mod 4) = 1 (mod 4) (Theorem 2.1(4)). Then product. Suppose k is even. Then P = ∼ 3 (mod 4), so by Problem 1.3(10) has to have a prime factor of the form 4n + 3. But pi - P + 2 for P +2 = all 1 ≤ i ≤ k as pi | P and pi - 2. This is a contradiction. If k is odd, then P ∼ = 3k (mod 4) = 3 (mod 4). Then, P + 4 is a number of the form 4n + 3, so it must have a prime factor of the form 4n + 3 by Problem 1.3(10). But pi - P + 4 as pi | P and pi - 4, which is a contradiction. This shows that there must be infinitely many primes of the form 4n + 3. The proof for the infinitude of primes of the form 6n + 5 is along the same lines. Suppose there are only finitely many; say {p1 , . . . , pk }. Let P denote their product as before. 52 ∼ = 1 (mod 6). If k is even, then P +4 ∼ = 25k/2 + 4 (mod 6) = 5 (mod 6) and so P + 4 must have a prime divisor of the form 6n + 5 by Problem 1.3(10) but none of the pi s divide P + 4. Similarly, if k is odd, then P + 6 ∼ = 5 (mod 6) so P + 6 must have a prime divisor of the form 6n + 5 by Problem 1.3(10) but none of the pi s divide P + 6 as pi | P and pi - 6 for every i. Q 5 (1.3(41)). Prove that an odd integer n > 1 is prime if and only if it is not expressible as a sum of three or more consecutive positive integers. Proof. If an odd integer n is expressible as a sum of three or more consecutive positive integers, then for some m ≥ 1 and k ≥ 3, n = m + (m + 1) + . . . + (m + (k − 1)) = km + k(k − 1) 2 and cannot be prime (k and m + k−1 If k is odd, then n = k. m + k−1 2 2 are integers strictly bigger than 1). k If k is even, then, n = 2 .(2m + (k − 1)) and once again cannot be prime as k2 and 2m + (k − 1) are integers strictly bigger than 1. If an odd integer n is not prime, write n = a.b for some other positive integers a and b strictly bigger than 1. a and b must be odd. Assume a ≤ b without loss of generality. Let k = a ≥ 3 and a−1 a+1 m = b − a−1 2 ≥ a − 2 = 2 ≥ 2. Then, m + (m + 1) + . . . + (m + (k − 1)) = km + k(k − 1) k−1 = k.(m + ) = a.b = n 2 2 Q 6 (1.4(10)). Let S be a set of n elements. Count the number of ordered pairs (A, B) of subsets such that ∅ ⊂ A ⊂ B ⊂ S. Let c(j, k) denote the number of such ordered pairs for which A contains j elements and B contains k elements. Show that X (1 + y + xy)n = c(j, k)xj y k 0≤j≤k≤n What does this give for x = y = 1? 2 Proof. The number of ways of picking the subset B is ways of picking A, so in total c(j, k) = nk kj . (1 + y(1 + x))n = n k and for each way of picking B there are n X n k=0 k (y(1 + x)) k j many k k X k = yk xj k j j=0 k=0 X nk = y k xj k j 0≤j≤k≤n X = c(j, k)y k xj n X n 0≤j≤k≤n We applied the binomial theorem twice, once in line 1 and once in line 3. For x = y = 1, this gives X 3n = c(j, k) 0≤j≤k≤n Q 7 (1.4(20)). Show that if m and n are integers with 0 ≤ m < n, then n X n k−1 (−1)k = (−1)m+1 k m k=m+1 Pn Proof. We will show this by induction on m. If m = 0, then we have to show k=1 (−1)k nk = −1 (as k−1 = k−1 = 1 for all k). This follows by applying the binomial expansion for (a + b)n with a = −1 and m 0 Pn k k−1 k−1 b = 1. Let Sm = k=m+1 (−1)k nk k−1 + m−1 = m−1 . m . Recall m ! n X k−1 k−1 m k n m n Sm + S(m−1) = (−1) + + (−1) k m m−1 m m k=m+1 ! n X n k n m = (−1)k + (−1)m k m m m k=m+1 n X n k (−1)k = k m k=m =0 We get the last equality by plugging in y = −1 in the equality from Problem 1.4(10) and comparing the coefficient of xm on both sides (we are using m < n here). Q 8 (2.1(6)). Prove that if p is a prime and a2 ∼ = b2 (mod p), then p | (a + b) or p | (a − b). Proof. a2 ∼ = b2 (mod p) ⇔ p | (a2 − b2 ) ⇔ p | (a − b)(a + b) ⇔ p | (a + b) or p | (a − b) Q 9 (2.1(14)). Show that 7 | 32n+1 + 2n+2 . Proof. 9 ∼ = 2 (mod 7). 32n+1 ∼ = 3.9n (mod 7) = 3.2n (mod 7) So 32n+1 + 2n+2 ∼ = 3.2n + 4.2n (mod 7) = 7.2n (mod 7) = 0 (mod 7) 3 Q 10 (2.1(17)). Show that 61! + 1 ∼ = 63! + 1 ∼ = 0(mod 71). Proof. 70! + 1 ∼ = 0 (mod 71) by Wilson’s theorem. −71.71 = −5041. Now, 64.65.66.67.68.69.70 ∼ = (−7).(−6).(−5).(−4).(−3).(−2).(−1) (mod 71) = −5040 (mod 71) = 1 (mod 71) Therefore, 63! ∼ = 70! (mod 71) = −1 (mod 71) 62.63.64.65.66.67.68.69.70 ∼ = (−9).(−8).1 (mod 71) = 72 (mod 71) = 1 (mod 71) 61! ∼ = 70! (mod 71) = −1 (mod 71) Q 11 (2.1(38)). Prove that there are infinitely many primes of the form 4n + 1. Proof. Suppose there were only finitely many say {p1 , p2 , . . . pk }. Let P denote their product. Consider the number N = 4P 2 + 1. A prime divisor of this number, say l, has to be odd (as N is odd) and also be different from any of the primes we listed. Then 2P (mod l) is a square root of −1 modulo l, so l has to be a prime of the form 4n + 1 which is a contradiction. 4