English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

If someone could help me with this one, I'm almost entirely lost as to what methods will work for this....

Prove for every positive integer n: 3 divides evenly into n^3 - n

I.e. 3 will divide evenly into n^3 - n with no remainder left.

My prof seemed to recommend induction, but I don't see how to do that here...and then I tried to do it by cases, but the first case i tried (when n is odd) won't seem to do me any good (it reduces to 8k^2(k+2)+2 ....how can i prove that's divisible by 3??)

Thanks in any case, I need the help!!

2007-11-06 06:47:19 · 4 answers · asked by netsurfer733 2 in Science & Mathematics Mathematics

4 answers

Factor n^3 - n first.
n^3 - n = n(n^2 - 1) = n(n+1)(n-1) = (n-1)(n)(n+1)

So (n^3 - n) is the product of three consecutive integers.

Since given any three consecutive integers, one of them has to be a multiple of three.

Let (n-1) be the multiple of 3. So 3 divides (n-1).
This implies 3 also divides (n-1)(n)(n+1)

Similarly
Let (n) be the multiple of 3. So 3 divides (n).
This implies 3 also divides (n-1)(n)(n+1)

Similarly
Let (n+1) be the multiple of 3. So 3 divides (n+1).
This implies 3 also divides (n-1)(n)(n+1)

So its true in all three cases.

You don't have to use induction unless you want to.

2007-11-06 06:57:19 · answer #1 · answered by Jeƒƒ Lebowski 6 · 1 0

Although you have not seen it, the idea that leads to the solution of this problem is quite simple and easy to comprehend.

First try to factorize the given expression;
n^3 - n = (n-1)(n)(n+1)

Now let us exmine the 3 factors;
(n-1), n and (n+1) are three consecutive intergers. Therefore 3 will divide evenly into any one of them. For instnce, take the three numbers 28, 29 and 30. As you see 3 will divide evenly into 30. Once again take 1001, 1002 and 1003 and you will see that 3 will divide evenly into 1002.

If one of the factor of an expression can be devided by 3 with no remainder, 3 will divide evenly into the expression.

If you want to know more about these things try to get hold of book on number theory.

Have a nice day!

2007-11-06 07:09:53 · answer #2 · answered by Unknown 2 · 0 0

Assume it works for n = k, then for n=k+1, the expression is

(k+1)^3 - (k+1) =
(k+1)[(k+1)^2 - 1] =
(k+1)[ k^2 + 2k + 1 - 1 ] =
(k+1)[ k^2 + 2k ] =
k^3 + k^2 + 2k^2 + 2k =
k^3 + 3k^2 + 2k =
3k^2 + k^3 + 2k =
3k^2 + (k^3 - k) + 3k

We already assumed that k^3 - k is a multiple of 3. And obviously, 3k^2 and 3k are both multiples of 3. That means the sum of these three terms is a multiple of 3, because you can factor a 3 out.

This proves that if it works for n=k, it works for n=k+1. Finally, we notice that if n=1, we get 1^3 - 1 = 0 which is divisible by 3. This finishes the proof.

Another way to prove this is to think of all positive integers as being in the form of 3m + r, where m is an integer and r is 0, 1, or -1. Then n^3 - n is
n(n^2 - 1) =
(3m + r)((3m+r)^2 - 1) =
(3m + r)(9m^2 + 6mr + r^2 - 1) =
(27m^3 + 18m^2 r + 3mr^2 - 3m) + (9m^2 r + 6mr^2 + r^3 - r)=
27m^3 + 27m^2 r + 9mr^2 - 3m + r^3 - r
3(9m^3 + 9m^2 r + 3mr^2 - m) + r(r^2 - 1)

Whether r = 0, 1, or -1, the term on the right end will be 0. This leaves a multiple of 3 on the left.

2007-11-06 06:53:50 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

For the best answers, search on this site https://shorturl.im/avcc4

7!=5040, 3^7=2187. So n!>3^n for n=7. Assume for some n, n! > 3^n. For n+1, (n+1)! - 3^(n+1) = (n+1)*n! - 3* 3^n > 3*n! - 3*3^n = (n! - 3^n) 3 > 0 from induction hypothesis. Therefore (n+1)! > 3^(n+1) is also true. QED. -------------------------- When n=1, 7^1 - 2^1 = 5 is divisible by 5. Assume for some n, 7^n - 2^n is divisible by 5. For n+1, 7^(n+1) - 2^(n+1) = 7*7^n - 2*2^n = 5*7^n + 2*7^n - 2*2^n = 5*7^n + 2*(7^n - 2*2^n) The first term 5*7^n is divisible by 5, the second is also divisible by 5 from hypothesis. Therefore, 7^(n+1) - 2^(n+1) is divisible by 5. QED

2016-04-02 09:44:27 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

You almost had the right idea, except you needed to look at 3 cases, not 2.

That said, there are three good answers up already, so I'll stop here.

2007-11-06 10:18:58 · answer #5 · answered by Curt Monash 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers