Difference between revisions of "2008 IMO Problems/Problem 3"
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
(still editing...) | (still editing...) | ||
− | The main idea is to take a gaussian prime <math>a+bi</math> and multiply it by a "smaller" <math>c+di</math> to get <math>n+i</math>. The rest is just making up the little details. | + | The main idea is to take a gaussian prime <math>a+bi</math> and multiply it by a "twice smaller" <math>c+di</math> to get <math>n+i</math>. The rest is just making up the little details. |
For each sufficiently large prime <math>p</math> of the form <math>4k+1</math>, we shall find a corresponding <math>n</math> satisfying the required condition with the prime number in question being <math>p</math>. Since there exist infinitely many such primes and, for each of them, <math>n \ge \sqrt{p-1}</math>, we will have found infinitely many distinct <math>n</math> satisfying the problem. | For each sufficiently large prime <math>p</math> of the form <math>4k+1</math>, we shall find a corresponding <math>n</math> satisfying the required condition with the prime number in question being <math>p</math>. Since there exist infinitely many such primes and, for each of them, <math>n \ge \sqrt{p-1}</math>, we will have found infinitely many distinct <math>n</math> satisfying the problem. | ||
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
Take a prime <math>p</math> of the form <math>4k+1</math> and consider its "sum-of-two squares" representation <math>p=a^2+b^2</math>, which we know to exist for all such primes. If <math>a=1</math> or <math>b=1</math>, then <math>n=b</math> or <math>n=a</math> is our guy, and <math>p=n^2+1 > 2n+\sqrt{2n}</math> as long as <math>p</math> (and hence <math>n</math>) is large enough. Let's see what happens when both <math>a>1</math> and <math>b>1</math>. | Take a prime <math>p</math> of the form <math>4k+1</math> and consider its "sum-of-two squares" representation <math>p=a^2+b^2</math>, which we know to exist for all such primes. If <math>a=1</math> or <math>b=1</math>, then <math>n=b</math> or <math>n=a</math> is our guy, and <math>p=n^2+1 > 2n+\sqrt{2n}</math> as long as <math>p</math> (and hence <math>n</math>) is large enough. Let's see what happens when both <math>a>1</math> and <math>b>1</math>. | ||
− | Since <math>a</math> and <math>b</math> are | + | Since <math>a</math> and <math>b</math> are (obviously) co-prime, there must exist integers <math>c</math> and <math>d</math> such that |
− | <cmath>ad+bc=1 \ | + | <cmath>ad+bc=1 \leqno{(1)}</cmath> |
In fact, if <math>c</math> and <math>d</math> are such numbers, then <math>c\pm a</math> and <math>d\mp b</math> work as well, so we can assume that <math>c \in \left(\frac{-a}{2}, \frac{a}{2}\right)</math>. | In fact, if <math>c</math> and <math>d</math> are such numbers, then <math>c\pm a</math> and <math>d\mp b</math> work as well, so we can assume that <math>c \in \left(\frac{-a}{2}, \frac{a}{2}\right)</math>. | ||
Define <math>n=|ac-bd|</math> and let's see what happens. Notice that <math>(a^2+b^2)(c^2+d^2)=n^2+1</math>. | Define <math>n=|ac-bd|</math> and let's see what happens. Notice that <math>(a^2+b^2)(c^2+d^2)=n^2+1</math>. | ||
− | If <math>c=\pm\frac{a}{2}</math>, then from (1), we get <math>a/2</math> and hence <math>a=2</math>. That means that <math>d=-\frac{b-1}{2}</math> | + | If <math>c=\pm\frac{a}{2}</math>, then from (1), we get <math>a/2</math> and hence <math>a=2</math>. That means that <math>d=-\frac{b-1}{2}</math> and <math>n=\frac{b(b-1)}{2}-2</math>. Therefore, <math>b^2-b=2n+4>2n</math> and so <math>\left(b-\frac{1}{2}\right)>2n</math>, from where <math>b > \sqrt{2n}+\frac{1}{2}</math>. Finally, <math>p=b^2+2^2 > 2n+\sqrt{2n}</math> and the case <math>a=2</math> is cleared. |
Revision as of 21:06, 3 September 2008
(still editing...)
The main idea is to take a gaussian prime and multiply it by a "twice smaller" to get . The rest is just making up the little details.
For each sufficiently large prime of the form , we shall find a corresponding satisfying the required condition with the prime number in question being . Since there exist infinitely many such primes and, for each of them, , we will have found infinitely many distinct satisfying the problem.
Take a prime of the form and consider its "sum-of-two squares" representation , which we know to exist for all such primes. If or , then or is our guy, and as long as (and hence ) is large enough. Let's see what happens when both and .
Since and are (obviously) co-prime, there must exist integers and such that In fact, if and are such numbers, then and work as well, so we can assume that .
Define and let's see what happens. Notice that .
If , then from (1), we get and hence . That means that and . Therefore, and so , from where . Finally, and the case is cleared.