Proving a number is divisible by 48

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter johnnyICON
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that for an even integer n, the expression n(n^2 + 20) is divisible by 48. Participants explore various approaches, including modular arithmetic and specific integer substitutions, while grappling with generalization and proof techniques.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Homework-related
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant begins by substituting n with 2k, leading to the expression 8k(k^2 + 5) and expresses uncertainty about the next steps.
  • Another participant suggests that proving divisibility by 48 requires showing the expression is congruent to 0 mod 48.
  • Some participants test specific values of k (like k=1 and k=2) to check for divisibility, noting that while specific cases work, generalization remains challenging.
  • A later reply proposes that to show 8k(k^2 + 5) is divisible by 48, it suffices to demonstrate that k(k^2 + 5) is divisible by 6, suggesting a modular approach.
  • Participants discuss the properties of numbers and modular arithmetic, including the idea that for any integer k, at least one of k or k^2 + 5 must be divisible by 2 and at least one must be divisible by 3.
  • There is mention of using induction as a potential method, although one participant notes they have not yet learned this technique in their course.
  • Some participants explore the concept of congruences and how to manipulate expressions under modular conditions, leading to discussions about equivalences and simplifications.
  • One participant expresses confusion about applying modular arithmetic to individual terms in an expression and seeks clarification on the rules governing congruences.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the best approach to prove the divisibility. Multiple competing views and methods are presented, with ongoing uncertainty about generalization and the application of modular arithmetic.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express limitations in their understanding of modular arithmetic and proof techniques, which may affect their ability to engage with the problem fully. There are also unresolved questions about the application of specific mathematical properties and rules.

johnnyICON
Messages
79
Reaction score
0
I am trying to prove that for an integer n, if even, then n(n^2 + 20) is divisible by 48.

I have done all the obvious, that is subtituting n with 2k for some integer k, which yields 8k(k^2 + 5). And this is where I get stuck.

Where do I go next? k^2 + 5 does not factor.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, if it's divisible by 48, then it should be equal to 0 mod 48, right?
 
is it true for k=1?, k=2?,...
 
You're down to trying to show 8k(k^2+5) is divisible by 48. It's enough to should that k(k^2+5) is divisible by 6, which can be done by considering this equation mod 6.
 
Hurkyl said:
Well, if it's divisible by 48, then it should be equal to 0 mod 48, right?
Right :D

mathwonk said:
is it true for k=1?, k=2?,...
Yes, it is true for 1 and 2. Haha, that's where I usually get into some trouble, making things general. I can find millions of examples, but it takes me forever to find a way to make it into a generalization.

shmoe said:
You're down to trying to show 8k(k^2+5) is divisible by 48. It's enough to should that k(k^2+5) is divisible by 6, which can be done by considering this equation mod 6.
Ok, so I've tried this. I made a statement that since 8k(k^2+5) is divisible by 8, then I need to show that 6 divides k(k^2+5).I have tried a few numbers, 1 for example and it leaves a remainder of 1.

Right now, I'm trying to apply a rule for whether or a not a number is divisible by 6 to k(k^2+5). Am I straying from what you intended me to do?
 
I have tried a few numbers

There are only 6 numbers to try...
 
If your rule for determining if a number is divisible by 6 involves doing something to the digits, then you're going the wrong way.

Maybe try breaking it up into even smaller problems, can you show k(k^2+5) is divisible by 2?

(related question, can you show for any n that n(n+1) is divisible by 2?)

edit-I'm going slower than Hurkyl's post last post is suggesting. Try to understand his post first if you can!
 
Hurkyl said:
Well, if it's divisible by 48, then it should be equal to 0 mod 48, right?

Haha, you're going to have to excuse me Hurkyl, I'm just a beginner with congruencies. Do you mind elaborating a little more?

I know I need to show that [tex]n(n^2+20) \equiv 0 \mod \48[/tex]. With n being even, then [tex]2k(2k^2+20) \equiv \0 \mod \48[/tex] for some integer k...

:cry: that's as far as i can go
 
To sum up Shmoe's suggestion, if it is always the case for any k, that at least one of the two factors k and K^2+5 is divisible by 2; and, also that at least one of the two factors is divisible by 3, then the product is necessarily divisible by 2*3. Hint you should of course know that for any P, if k^n = a mod P then (k+P)^n = a mod P as every term of the polynominal expansion of the later equation, except k^n, = 0 mod P.
 
  • #10
ramsey2879 said:
Hint you should of course know that for any P, if k^n = a mod P then (k+P)^n = a mod P as every term of the polynominal expansion of the later equation, except k^n, = 0 mod P.

I wasn't aware of this property.
:cry:
 
  • #11
Sure you were. P = 0 (mod P), right?
 
  • #12
have you heard of induction?
 
  • #13
Yes I have, but my professor has not yet taught us induction. So I am probably not supposed to use it. I heard it's much easier doing this proof by induction as well. :( Just my luck.
 
  • #14
One thing you seem not to have noticed yet is that when you're dealing with an expression, such as x^2+5, modulo some number you can replace any term with an equivalent one modulo that number. For instance, we need to show that k^k^2+5) is divisible by 6, ie is zero mod 6. 5 is the same thing as -1 mod 6, so that

k(k^2+5)=k(k^2-1) mod 6

and k^2-1=(k+1)(k-1)

so we are trying to show that k(k-1)(k+1) is divisible by 6. But it's the product of three consecutive numbers so what must be true about them, I mean can there be three consecutive odd numbers?
 
  • #15
Oh wow, I didn't know I could do that.

So let's say I had something like [tex]5x^2 + 7x + 1[/tex], can I replace 5, 7 and 1 by a congruence?
 
  • #16
Yes, but it is only equivalent modulo whatever it is you're doing it modulo

x^2+5 is the same as x^2-1 mod 6 (and mod 3, and mod 2 as well) but they are not equivalent mod 7 for instance.
 
  • #17
johnnyICON said:
Oh wow, I didn't know I could do that.

So let's say I had something like [tex]5x^2 + 7x + 1[/tex], can I replace 5, 7 and 1 by a congruence?

[tex]5x^2 + 7x + 1 \equiv 5x^2 + 7x + 1 + kp + lpx + mpx^2 + ... ~~(mod~p) ~\equiv (5+mp)x^2 + (7+lp)x + (1+kp) + ... ~~(mod~p)[/tex]

Do you see why this is true ?
 
Last edited:
  • #18
matt grime said:
so we are trying to show that k(k-1)(k+1) is divisible by 6. But it's the product of three consecutive numbers so what must be true about them, I mean can there be three consecutive odd numbers?

I can derive a conclusion from this statement you made.. That is we know that at least one of these must be an even number, as well I can see how it is divisible by 3 and 2. Ahhh nevermind, now I see how it is divisible by 6. I think I do.

Because 3 * 2 = 6, therefore it must also be divisible by 6? Is that correct?
 
  • #19
Gokul43201 said:
[tex]5x^2 + 7x + 1 \equiv 5x^2 + 7x + 1 + kp + lpx + mpx^2 + ... ~~(mod~p) ~\equiv (5+mp)x^2 + (7+lp)x + (1+kp) + ... ~~(mod~p)[/tex]

Do you see why this is true ?

I see that you added some integers kp, lpx and mpx^2 to the original equation. And that's perfectly fine from what I understand. Then you grouped like-terms together in the last congruence.

Let's see if I can apply it. Let's say p = 5, does that mean then it is congruent to:
[tex]0 + 2x + 1 (mod~5)[/tex]?

How I derived this:
[tex]5 \equiv 0 (mod~5)[/tex] therefore [tex]5x^2 \equiv 0x^2 (mod~5) = 0[/tex]
[tex]7 \equiv 2 (mod~5)[/tex] therefore [tex]7x \equiv 2x (mod~5)[/tex]
[tex]1 \equiv 1 (mod~5)[/tex]
 
Last edited:
  • #20
johnnyICON said:
I see that you added some integers kp, lpx and mpx^2 to the original equation. And that's perfectly fine from what I understand. Then you grouped like-terms together in the last congruence.

Let's see if I can apply it. Let's say p = 5, does that mean then it is congruent to:
[tex]0 + 2x + 1 (mod~5)[/tex]?

How I derived this:
[tex]5 \equiv 0 (mod~5)[/tex] therefore [tex]5x^2 \equiv 0x^2 (mod~5) = 0[/tex]
[tex]7 \equiv 2 (mod~5)[/tex] therefore [tex]7x \equiv 2x (mod~5)[/tex]
[tex]1 \equiv 1 (mod~5)[/tex]
Yes, that's correct. And that's why matt's little trick does not alter the residue, while making the quadratic conveniently factorizable.
 
  • #21
Do I have to apply mod 5 to every term?

For example, [tex]3^{2n} + 7[/tex], could I apply mod p to the 7 only and still have it being congruent?
i.e.,
p = 8;
[tex]3^{2n} + 7 \equiv 3^{2n} -1 (mod~8)[/tex]?
or do I have to apply it to the 3 as well, that is, ... oh wait... it is already mod 8... but I could change it to
[tex]3^{2n} + 7 \equiv -4^{2n} -1 (mod~8)[/tex] correct?
 
Last edited:
  • #22
Since 0*p is divisible with p, yes.
 
  • #23
arildno said:
Since 0*p is divisible with p, yes.

Sorry, I just edited my post. Which post were you responding to?
 
  • #24
johnnyICON said:
Do I have to apply mod 5 to every term?

For example, [tex]3^{2n} + 7[/tex], could I apply mod p to the 7 only and still have it being congruent?
i.e.,
p = 8;
[tex]3^{2n} + 7 \equiv 3^{2n} -1 (mod~8)[/tex]?
You are not "applying mod p to the 7 only". You are adding integers to the LHS that are congruent to 0 modulo p. Start from the definition of a congruence modulo n : What does [itex]a \equiv b ~(mod~n)~[/itex] mean ?
 
  • #25
johnnyICON said:
[tex]3^{2n} + 7 \equiv -4^{2n} -1 (mod~8)[/tex] correct?
How did you get this ?
 
  • #26
johnnyICON said:
Sorry, I just edited my post. Which post were you responding to?
I was responding to your unedited post.

Do as Darth Gokul saith, be sure you understand the definition of congruence.
 
  • #27
n divides a-b, ahh :smile:
 
Last edited:
  • #28
Gokul43201 said:
How did you get this ?

[tex]3 \equiv 3 (mod~8)[/tex]
[tex]7 \equiv[/tex]-1 [tex](mod~8)[/tex]
 
  • #29
LOL, which pretty much states that I did not apply mod 8 to just the 7. Sorry, I'm a goof :biggrin:
 
  • #30
My professor has posted up the proof to this question and I am not understanding one thing: The part where I have to prove that [tex]6|k^3 + 5k[/tex]. His proof states that k must take one of six forms, that is 6m, 6m+1, 6m+2, 6m+3, 6m+5, and must be divisible by 6 when substituted in for k.

The case thing is what I don't understand. Why does this prove that [tex]6|k^3 + 5k[/tex]?
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
5K
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K