Does n Divide (n-1)! for Composite and Prime Numbers?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter margot
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Composite
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on whether a composite integer \( n \) (where \( n \geq 6 \)) divides \((n-1)!\) and whether a prime number \( n \) divides \((n-1)!\). Participants explore these concepts through mathematical reasoning and examples.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that if \( n \) is a composite integer \( (n \geq 6) \), then \( n \) divides \((n-1)!\).
  • Others argue that if \( n \) is a prime number, then \( n \) cannot divide \((n-1)!\) because it is not included in the prime factorization of any number less than itself.
  • A participant presents two cases for composite \( n \): if \( n \) is not a square, it can be expressed as \( n = km \) with \( k \) and \( m \) both less than \( n \), thus both factors are included in \((n-1)!\); if \( n \) is a square of a prime \( p \), then \( n \) divides \((n-1)!\) because both \( p \) and \( 2p \) are factors of \((n-1)!\).
  • Another participant provides examples, such as \( n = 4 \) and \( n = 6 \), to illustrate why certain composite numbers do or do not divide \((n-1)!\).
  • Further examples are given for \( n = 216 \) to show that \( n \) divides \((n-1)!\) due to the presence of sufficient prime factors in the factorial product.
  • Some participants acknowledge oversimplifications in their examples and clarify that for \( n = p^2 \), both \( p \) and \( qp \) (where \( q \) is a prime less than \( p \)) are factors in \((n-1)!\), thus \( n \) divides \((n-1)!\).
  • There is a generalization proposed for \( n = p^a \) (where \( a > 2 \)), suggesting that \( n \) divides \((n-1)!\) based on the prime factorization.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the divisibility of \((n-1)!\) by \( n \) for composite and prime numbers. While some points are clarified, no consensus is reached on all aspects of the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on the definitions of composite and prime numbers, as well as the specific cases discussed. The discussion does not resolve all mathematical steps or assumptions regarding the divisibility conditions.

margot
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
can u help me with this question

If n ≥ 6 is a composite integer, then n |(n − 1)! If n is a prime number, then n does not divide (n−1)!
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Two cases:

1. n not a square, then n=km, where k different from m, k<n, and m<n. Then both are separate factors of (n-1)! so that n divides (n-1)!

2. n a square of a prime p (if n is a square of non-prime case 1 could be used), then let k=p and m=2p, both < n, since p > 2. Then we have 2n divides (n-1)! so that n divides (n-1)!
This also illiustrates why 4 has to be excluded.
 


For your second part, if n is prime, then n cannot divide any number less than itself. In other words, it is not in the prime factorization of those numbers. So a product of those numbers will still not contain that prime number, and thus n will never divide (n-1)!

For your first part, again, look at the prime factorization. n is composite, so it's prime factors will be less than n. What happens when you do the product (n-1)!?
Let's investigate why n ≥ 6 and composite ..
The first composite number is 4, this is 2^2 (prime factorization). (4-1)! = 3*2 ... clearly 2^2 can't divide 3*2, because there's not enough powers of 2.
The next composite number is 6 = 2*3. (6-1)! = 5*4*3*2 ... can you see that 6|5!? (The 3*2 parts cancel and you're left with 5*4=20).

Let's do another example ... say n = 216 = 2^3*3^3. (216-1)! = 215*214*213*...*27*...*8*...*4*3*2. You will notice that 27=3^3 and 8=2^3 ... so for that last bit we have 215! = 215*...*3^3*...*2^3*...*4*3*2. So 216|215!

Do you see what's going on?
 


thanks so much ... now i get it :)
 


Bingk said:
For your second part, if n is prime, then n cannot divide any number less than itself. In other words, it is not in the prime factorization of those numbers. So a product of those numbers will still not contain that prime number, and thus n will never divide (n-1)!

For your first part, again, look at the prime factorization. n is composite, so it's prime factors will be less than n. What happens when you do the product (n-1)!?
Let's investigate why n ≥ 6 and composite ..
The first composite number is 4, this is 2^2 (prime factorization). (4-1)! = 3*2 ... clearly 2^2 can't divide 3*2, because there's not enough powers of 2.
The next composite number is 6 = 2*3. (6-1)! = 5*4*3*2 ... can you see that 6|5!? (The 3*2 parts cancel and you're left with 5*4=20).

Let's do another example ... say n = 216 = 2^3*3^3. (216-1)! = 215*214*213*...*27*...*8*...*4*3*2. You will notice that 27=3^3 and 8=2^3 ... so for that last bit we have 215! = 215*...*3^3*...*2^3*...*4*3*2. So 216|215!

Do you see what's going on?
That will work when the composite number is a*b where a<b but doesn't address the second case where a = b as covered by mathman.
 


Yeah, I admit that I oversimplified my example, just to help see what's going on ...

For the case when n=p^2, this is what happens, 1<p<p^2 and 1<qp<p^2, where q is prime and q<p. so p and qp are still factors in (n-1)! so if we regroup it, (n-1)! = (n-1)*(n-2)*...*qp^2*...4*3*2 and we can see that p^2 is a factor in (n-1)!, so n|(n-1)!. It's just a matter of looking at the prime factorization of (n-1)! and comparing it to the prime factorization of n.

We can also generalize, for n=p^a, a>2, we have that p^(a-1) and p is a factor in (n-1)! so we p^(a-1)*p = p^a is a factor in (n-1)! so n|(n-1)!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
48
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
1K