Browse · MathNet
PrintChinese Mathematical Olympiad
China number theory
Problem
Given an integer , prove that there exists a set of distinct positive integers such that for any two distinct nonempty subsets and of , the numbers are two coprime composite integers, and denotes the sum of all elements of a finite set , and denotes the cardinality of .
Solution
Let be the average of elements of the finite number set .
First of all, make different primes which are all bigger than , and we prove that for any different nonempty subsets , of the set , always holds.
In fact, we can suppose that and without loss of generality. Every element of can be divided by , so . But has exactly one element which cannot be divided by , so we find that cannot be divided by (note that ), and therefore , which follows .
Second, let . Then and are different positive integers when are different nonempty subsets of .
In fact, it is easy to see that there exist two sets which are different nonempty subsets of , and , holds. We get from , and are positive integers from and their elements are all positive.
Then, let be the largest element of . We prove that for every two distinct subsets of the set , and are coprime integers which are both larger than .
In fact, it is easy to see that there exist two sets which are different nonempty subsets of , and , holds. Obviously, and are different integers which are both larger than . If they have common divisors, let be a prime common divisor of them without loss of generality. Clearly, we have . We get by and , so , which follows , and then — a contradiction.
Lastly, let be the largest element of . We prove that for every two distinct nonempty subsets of the set , and are two composites which share no common divisors.
In fact, it is easy to see that there exist two sets which are different nonempty subsets of , and , holds. Obviously, and are different integers which are both larger than . Because of that, is the largest element of , and we have and . We find that is composite by . For a similar reason, is composite too. If they have common divisors, let be a prime common divisor of them without loss of generality. It is obvious that . We get by and , so , which follows and — a contradiction of the fact that and are coprime. This completes the proof.
First of all, make different primes which are all bigger than , and we prove that for any different nonempty subsets , of the set , always holds.
In fact, we can suppose that and without loss of generality. Every element of can be divided by , so . But has exactly one element which cannot be divided by , so we find that cannot be divided by (note that ), and therefore , which follows .
Second, let . Then and are different positive integers when are different nonempty subsets of .
In fact, it is easy to see that there exist two sets which are different nonempty subsets of , and , holds. We get from , and are positive integers from and their elements are all positive.
Then, let be the largest element of . We prove that for every two distinct subsets of the set , and are coprime integers which are both larger than .
In fact, it is easy to see that there exist two sets which are different nonempty subsets of , and , holds. Obviously, and are different integers which are both larger than . If they have common divisors, let be a prime common divisor of them without loss of generality. Clearly, we have . We get by and , so , which follows , and then — a contradiction.
Lastly, let be the largest element of . We prove that for every two distinct nonempty subsets of the set , and are two composites which share no common divisors.
In fact, it is easy to see that there exist two sets which are different nonempty subsets of , and , holds. Obviously, and are different integers which are both larger than . Because of that, is the largest element of , and we have and . We find that is composite by . For a similar reason, is composite too. If they have common divisors, let be a prime common divisor of them without loss of generality. It is obvious that . We get by and , so , which follows and — a contradiction of the fact that and are coprime. This completes the proof.
Techniques
Prime numbersGreatest common divisors (gcd)Least common multiples (lcm)Factorization techniques