Difference between revisions of "2006 USAMO Problems/Problem 4"
Mathcrazed (talk | contribs) |
Mathcrazed (talk | contribs) (→Solution) |
||
Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
If <math>n=5</math>, proceed as above and consider <math>k=2</math>. Then <math>a_1+a_2=5</math> and <math>a_1a_2=5</math>. However, we then come to the quadratic <math>a_1^2-5a_1+5=0 \Longrightarrow a_1=\frac{5\pm\sqrt{5}}{2}</math>, which is not rational. For <math>k=3</math> and <math>k=4</math> we note that <math>\sqrt[3]{5}>\frac{5}{3}</math> and <math>\sqrt[4]{5}>\frac{5}{4}</math>. This is trivial to prove. If <math>k\ge 5</math>, it is obviously impossible, and thus <math>n=5</math> does not work. | If <math>n=5</math>, proceed as above and consider <math>k=2</math>. Then <math>a_1+a_2=5</math> and <math>a_1a_2=5</math>. However, we then come to the quadratic <math>a_1^2-5a_1+5=0 \Longrightarrow a_1=\frac{5\pm\sqrt{5}}{2}</math>, which is not rational. For <math>k=3</math> and <math>k=4</math> we note that <math>\sqrt[3]{5}>\frac{5}{3}</math> and <math>\sqrt[4]{5}>\frac{5}{4}</math>. This is trivial to prove. If <math>k\ge 5</math>, it is obviously impossible, and thus <math>n=5</math> does not work. | ||
− | The last case, where <math>n=7</math>, is possible using the following three numbers. <math>a_1=\frac{9} | + | The last case, where <math>n=7</math>, is possible using the following three numbers. <math>a_1=\frac{9}{2}, a_2=\frac{4}{3}, a_3=\frac{7}{6}</math> shows that <math>n=7</math> is possible. |
Hence, <math>n</math> can be any positive integer greater than <math>3</math> with the exclusion of <math>5</math>. | Hence, <math>n</math> can be any positive integer greater than <math>3</math> with the exclusion of <math>5</math>. | ||
+ | |||
== See Also == | == See Also == | ||
Revision as of 20:45, 13 April 2008
Problem
Find all positive integers such that there are positive rational numbers satisfying .
Solution
First, consider composite numbers. We can then factor into It is easy to see that , and thus, we can add 1s in order to achieve a sum and product of . For , which is only possible in one case, , we consider .
Secondly, let be a prime. Then we can find the following procedure: Let and let the rest of the be 1. The only numbers we now need to check are those such that . Thus, we need to check for . One is included because it is neither prime nor composite.
For , consider . Then by AM-GM, for . Thus, is impossible.
If , once again consider . Similar to the above, for since and . Obviously, is then impossible.
If , let . Again, . This is obvious for . Now consider . Then is obviously greater than . Thus, is impossible.
If , proceed as above and consider . Then and . However, we then come to the quadratic , which is not rational. For and we note that and . This is trivial to prove. If , it is obviously impossible, and thus does not work.
The last case, where , is possible using the following three numbers. shows that is possible.
Hence, can be any positive integer greater than with the exclusion of .