Show that 2^(k-1) doesn't divide n(n-1)/2

  • Thread starter _Andreas
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation discusses the task of showing that 2^(k-1) does not divide n(n-1)/2, given the condition that 2^(k-1) divides n while 2^k does not. The conversation examines the steps to prove this, including showing that m, the integer resulting from dividing n by 2^k, is not divisible by 2. It is noted that the condition that k≥1 should actually be k>1, as the case of k=1 would make the premise trivial. Finally, it is concluded that the problem refers to a non-trivial 2^(k-1).
  • #1
_Andreas
144
1

Homework Statement



[tex]2^{k-1}[/tex] divides n, while [tex]2^k[/tex] does not. Show that [tex]2^{k-1}[/tex] does not divide [tex]\frac{n(n-1)}{2}[/tex].

The Attempt at a Solution



That [tex]2^{k-1}[/tex] divides n implies that [tex]n=2^{k-1}m[/tex], where m is an integer.

[tex]\frac{n}{2^k}=\frac{m}{2}[/tex], which implies that [tex]2[/tex] does not divide m, which in turn implies that [tex]k\geq 1[/tex].

[tex]\frac{\frac{n(n-1)}{2}}{2^{k-1}}=\frac{m}{2}(n-1)[/tex]

However, the last expression seems like it could still be an integer, given the premises above. Am I missing something?

(Intermediate steps are not shown because I've recalculated them several times and found them to be correct. I'm pretty sure there must be something else that's wrong or missing.)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
you've already shown that m is not divisible by 2; so how could (m/2)(n-1) be an integer?
 
  • #3
[tex]\frac {\frac {n(n-1)} {2}}{2^{k-1}} = \frac {n(n-1)} {2^k}[/tex]

n is even.
 
  • #4
Of course, m is an odd integer if it isn't divisible by 2, so if n is even I have shown what I'm supposed to show. But how can n be even if [tex]k\geq 1[/tex]?
 
  • #5
n=2^(k-1)m which is an integer, m multiplied by some (positive integer) power of 2...hence n must be even
 
  • #6
gabbagabbahey said:
n=2^(k-1)m which is an integer, m multiplied by some (positive integer) power of 2...hence n must be even

But if k=1 I then have 2^0*m=m.
 
  • #7
Your condition should be that k>1...k≠1 because k=1 implies that you are counting k^0=1 as a non-trivial divisor of n.
 
  • #8
gabbagabbahey said:
Your condition should be that k>1...k≠1 because k=1 implies that you are counting k^0=1 as a non-trivial divisor of n.

Why does it imply that?
 
  • #9
Because if k=1, 2^(k-1)=2^0=1...which is a trivial divisor (every integer is divisible by 1), so your non-trivial cases are k>1 not k≥1.
 
  • #10
Yes, 1 is a trivial divisor, but why is it that k=1 implies that I'm counting 1 as a non-trivial divisor?
 
  • #11
Because one of the premises of your proof is that n is divisible by 2^(k-1); but if k=1, then that premise is trivial.

Considering that you are trying to show that n(n-1)/2 is not divisible by 2^(k-1); it seems reasonable that you assume that the problem refers to a non-trivial 2^(k-1).
 
  • #12
Aaah, I get it now! Thank you!
 

1. What is the formula for n(n-1)/2?

The formula for n(n-1)/2 is commonly known as the "choose" formula. It is used to calculate the number of combinations, or ways to choose, a certain number of objects from a larger set of objects.

2. How do you prove that 2^(k-1) doesn't divide n(n-1)/2?

To prove that 2^(k-1) doesn't divide n(n-1)/2, we can use mathematical induction. We first show that the statement is true for the base case, n=2. Then, we assume the statement is true for some arbitrary value of n and use this assumption to prove that it is also true for n+1. This will show that the statement holds for all values of n and thus prove that 2^(k-1) doesn't divide n(n-1)/2.

3. What is the significance of 2^(k-1) in this formula?

2^(k-1) represents the number of ways to choose k objects from a larger set of objects. This is because for each of the k objects, there are 2 choices (either include it in the combination or not), and we subtract 1 to account for the empty set. Therefore, if 2^(k-1) does not divide n(n-1)/2, it means that there is no way to divide n(n-1)/2 into k equal parts.

4. Can you provide an example to illustrate this concept?

Sure! Let's say we have 6 objects and we want to choose 3 of them. Using the choose formula, we get 6(6-1)/2 = 15. This means there are 15 ways to choose 3 objects from a set of 6. However, 2^(3-1) = 4, and 4 does not divide 15. This shows that we cannot divide 15 into 3 equal parts, further demonstrating that 2^(k-1) does not divide n(n-1)/2.

5. Are there any other methods to prove this statement?

Yes, there are other methods such as using modular arithmetic or contradiction. However, mathematical induction is the most commonly used and straightforward method to prove this statement.

Similar threads

  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
787
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
14
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
791
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
15
Views
965
Back
Top