Difference between revisions of "Talk:2012 USAMO Problems/Problem 4"
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
2. Second, suppose that for all <math>n</math>, <math>f(n)\le 2</math>. Then for <math>n\ge 3</math>, | 2. Second, suppose that for all <math>n</math>, <math>f(n)\le 2</math>. Then for <math>n\ge 3</math>, | ||
− | <math> 2\ge f(n!) = f(1) + C(n!-1) </math> (<math>C\ge 0</math> is an integer.) | + | <math> 2\ge f(n!) = f(1) + C(n!-1) </math> (where <math>C\ge 0</math> is an integer.) |
− | <math>\ge -2+5C</math>, therefore <math>5C\le 4</math> and so <math>C=0</math> is the only possibility. Hence <math>f(n)!=f(n!)=f(1)</math>. Similar argument yields that <math>f(n)!=f(n!)=f(2)</math>, so <math>f</math> is a constant function, which can only be <math>f=1</math> or <math>f=2</math>. | + | |
+ | <math>\ge -2+5C</math>, therefore <math>5C\le 4</math> and so <math>C=0</math> is the only possibility. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Hence <math>f(n)!=f(n!)=f(1)</math>. Similar argument yields that <math>f(n)!=f(n!)=f(2)</math>, so <math>f</math> is a constant function, | ||
+ | which can only be <math>f=1</math> or <math>f=2</math>. | ||
3. From now on, suppose that there exists <math>n_0\ge 3</math> such that <math>f(n_0)>2</math>. | 3. From now on, suppose that there exists <math>n_0\ge 3</math> such that <math>f(n_0)>2</math>. |
Revision as of 21:29, 3 May 2012
Though not as elegant as the inductive proof, my proof for this problem is quite different from the one posted in the Page, so I would like to paste it here just for reference.
1. First, , equal to or .
2. Second, suppose that for all , . Then for ,
(where is an integer.)
, therefore and so is the only possibility.
Hence . Similar argument yields that , so is a constant function, which can only be or .
3. From now on, suppose that there exists such that .
4. By and that we know that , or .
5. By we know that , and by and we know that , therefore .
6. Then by we know that is odd, so .
7. For , implies that , otherwise and that , which is a contradiction. Since , now we have , so . Now we have a lower bound. What is more difficult is to find an upper bound of .
(I know from the main Page it is not too hard to get the upper bound, but to be honest it takes me quite a while to figure it out.)
8. Therefore . Now , therefore if , then let and we have
, where the right hand side should not be divisible by and so . By induction we have for all .
--Lightest 22:26, 3 May 2012 (EDT)