Skip to main content
OlympiadHQ

Browse · MathNet

Print

23rd Korean Mathematical Olympiad Final Round

South Korea number theory

Problem

A prime is called nice prime if there exists sequences of positive integers satisfying the following conditions for infinitely many positive integers , but there does not exist such for . 1. For , . 2. For , is a multiple of and , are prime to each other. Set . Show that is not a nice prime, but any odd primes are nice primes.
Solution
Let us denote by when a positive integer divides . We write when a positive integer is a multiple of , but not of for a prime .

Lemma 1. For a given prime and a positive integer such that , let be the smallest positive integer satisfying . Any positive integer such that must be a multiple of . Proof. Put , where are integers and . Noting leads us to . By the minimality of , we get .

1. The case of It is immediate to note that all s are odd and greater than or equal to . Let be the smallest prime dividing one of . Without loss of generality, we assume . Let be the smallest positive integer satisfying . Then by Fermat's little theorem and Lemma 1, we get . Thus . We realize that has a smaller prime factor than , so it contradicts , which implies . We conclude that there does not exist fulfilling conditions, hence is not a nice prime.

2. The case of prime (1) In the case : we prove that there does not exist a positive integer such that and . First, under the condition , we show the smallest prime factor of must divide . Let , . implies . Let be the smallest positive integer such that . Then it is obvious that and . If , is a product of primes smaller than , it violates that cannot have smaller prime factors than . We obtain so . Now let . In the expression . We easily see the number of prime in is at least . So we get reducing to contradiction. In sum, for any given prime , there does not exist a positive integer satisfying all conditions when .

(2) In the case : we are always able to find sequences of positive integers for infinitely many . This proves that any odd primes are nice. There are various ways of taking the sequences and the proposed way below is one of them.

Lemma 2. For a positive integer and a prime , implies . Moreover, - When is odd or : the smallest positive integer such that is and holds. - When : Let be the smallest positive integer such that . Then the smallest positive integer satisfying is and holds.

Proof. Let us show only the first case. When , it is true by definition. Let us assume the statement is true when and try to show when . We need to find the smallest positive integer such that . Since also holds, by the assumption, is a multiple of and we set . From the equation , is already a multiple of , so it is enough to have a multiple of . implies and conversely, we easily check is really a multiple of when divides . Thus is a multiple of . On the other hand, is only a multiple of not of , whose proof is presented below. In conclusion, we obtain by induction. The reason for : Let be a positive integer such that . Then, . In the case , we are not able to guarantee the term in the almost last equation is a multiple of so we separate the case.

Now we define a prime dividing and let . Take and let be an integer such that for . Similarly, we define as an integer satisfying . Inductively for , let be an integer such that and . We define and in this way accordingly as gets increased one by one, then we notice that also gets large as does so. Fix and put . (When , let , where is in Lemma 2.(ii).) Since there exists an integer such that , we call such . Moreover, there exists a positive integer such that , which is justified by that the left hand side is a function divergent when goes to infinity. Now let be any integer greater than . Except the case , we can, in fact, define to be any integer greater than . We apply the above definition of and till and let . It is easy to observe . From our choices of sequences , it is clear to verify the following for The first one comes from . From Lemma 2, we even know holds when is odd or . Finally, let , then follows from Lemma 2, hence it satisfies the second condition for . We also obtain the first condition from . Noting for this and for , we establish .

Techniques

Greatest common divisors (gcd)Factorization techniquesFermat / Euler / Wilson theoremsMultiplicative order