Clarification on Proof by Contradiction

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the proof by contradiction regarding the proposition that the product of any five consecutive integers is divisible by 120. The initial attempt at negation was flawed, as it did not properly account for the generality of the statement, which requires negating both the property and its qualifier. Participants emphasized that the correct negation should state that there exist five consecutive integers whose product is not divisible by 120. A valid proof was later presented, demonstrating that within any set of five consecutive integers, there will always be multiples of 5, 4, 3, and at least two factors of 2, thereby confirming the original proposition. The conversation highlights the importance of rigor and clarity in mathematical proofs.
  • #31
@Jonathanlikesmath now you are very rigorous but you did it the very hard way, I had in mind something like what @PeroK suggests at post #29.

More specifically, if we write the product as ##n(n+1)(n+2)(n+3)(n+4)## then it will be either ##n\pmod 5=0## in which case we are finished, or one of the cases of ##n\pmod 5=1,n\pmod 5=2,n\pmod 5=3,n\pmod 5=4##. If for example ##n\pmod 5=1## then ##(n+4)\pmod 5=n\pmod 5+4\pmod 5=1+4\pmod 5=5\pmod 5 =0##, hence in this case 5 divides n+4. Similarly we can handle the other cases.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes PeroK
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Delta2 said:
@Jonathanlikesmath now you are very rigorous but you did it the very hard way, I had in mind something like what @PeroK suggests at post #29.

More specifically, if we write the product as ##n(n+1)(n+2)(n+3)(n+4)## then it will be either ##n\pmod 5=0## in which case we are finished, or one of the cases of ##n\pmod 5=1,n\pmod 5=2,n\pmod 5=3,n\pmod 5=4##. If for example ##n\pmod 5=1## then ##(n+4)\pmod 5=n\pmod 5+4\pmod 5=1+4\pmod 5=5\pmod 5 =0##, hence in this case 5 divides n+4. Similarly we can handle the other cases.
Well, I soon won't forget this method. Thank you all for the help!
 
  • Like
Likes Delta2
  • #33
PeroK said:
A better approach if you want to use modular arithmetic is to take:
$$P = (n - 2)(n-1)n(n+1)(n+2) = n(n^2 -1)(n^2 - 4)$$If ##n## is not divisible by ##3##, then ##n = 1## or ##2 \ (mod \ 3)##; ##n^2 = 1 \ (mod \ 3)##, so ##n^2 -1 ## is divisible by ##3##. Etc.
Just to say that I thought reducing the product to three terms looked like a good idea (and it is always something to consider), but in this case it doesn't really help. @Delta2 's method is much simpler!
 
  • Like
Likes Delta2

Similar threads

Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K