33^n+1 - 16^n+1 - 28^n+1 + 11^n+1View attachment 32200
do this since ur so smart
Lmao33^n+1 - 16^n+1 - 28^n+1 + 11^n+1
=16(33^n-16^n-28^n+11^n) + 17(33^n-28^n) + 5(28^n-11^n)
= not bothered to type out
= 85k
1, 2 skip a few 99, 10033^n+1 - 16^n+1 - 28^n+1 + 11^n+1
=16(33^n-16^n-28^n+11^n) + 17(33^n-28^n) + 5(28^n-11^n)
= not bothered to type out
= 85k
x^n-y^n factorisation where u pull out something to make 851, 2 skip a few 99, 100
ye still dont see itx^n-y^n factorisation where u pull out something to make 85
x^n-y^n factorisation where u pull out something to make 85
x^n-y^n is divisible by (x-y) There’s a different induction proof for this.ye still dont see it
geniusx^n-y^n is divisible by (x-y) There’s a different induction proof for this.
Therefore, 17(33^n-28^n) + 5(28^n-11^n) = 17*(33-28)*N1 + 5(28-11)*N2 = 17*5N1 + 5*17N2 = 85(N1 + N2)
In an induction proof, the first component of the algebraic expression is assumed to be divisible by 85.
A similar approach...
Result (A)
It follows that is divisible by for all positive integers .
Corollaries of Result (A)
Thus, is also divisible by 17.
- is divisible by .
- is divisible by .
HAHS Proof 1
Thus, is also divisible by 5.
- is divisible by .
- is divisible by .
Having proven the given result is divisible by both 17 and 5, and since these numbers are coprime, it immediately follows that the statement is also divisible by .
I didn't notice the proof of divisibility by 5, however, and proceeded instead to prove that the statement is divisible by 5 another way:
Re-casting the induction proof approach:
It follows from above that I seek to prove that:
- Defining and , I seek that is divisible by 85.
- It has been established that is divisible by 17, and that I only need to be divisible by 5.
And, by similar reasoning, where .
Note further that and that .
The core part of the proof by induction will have as the induction hypothesis that
and the working will establish that
NOTES:
- As an induction problem, this is too hard to be reasonable as a test of MX2 content.
- The assumption that this is an induction problem is just that - an assumption. This question illustrates a comment that I have made before, that the Proof section of the new syllabus offers opportunities to ask very difficult questions and the extent of this will be explored over years to come.
- Splitting into in the induction part uses the same idea / approach as is key in @idkkdi's very concise proof above
- The question could just have easily asked for a proof that the result is divisible by 170, as this is obviously follows once the divisibility by 85 is established.
This is essentially a watered-down version of another question that I had seen before.View attachment 32200
do this since ur so smart
can we get an admin to change her name?This is essentially a watered-down version of another question that I had seen before.
Prove that 2903^n – 803^n – 464^n + 261^n is divisible by 1897 for any positive integers.
This kind of problem can be solved by number theory in a much more elegant way. It is just not worthwhile to restrict yourself to MI and spend ages on some messy algebra like this.
View attachment 32214
Are you sure?just something to add,
View attachment 32213
result A only holds true for n, where n is odd.
probably need to take either two cases, or a more general proof.
was mixing it up with x^n+y^n which doesn't work for even.Are you sure?
Certainly the factorisation of only works for odd (as then , allowing the above factorisation to be used).
However, I am not seeing any flaw in the reasoning that I have used that falisfies the result for the case where is even and the result is certainly true for:
What do you think is wrong with my proof / reasoning?
Which question do you mean?Check out James Ruse 2018 Paper. I swear there was something similar!