Proof of n^m - n Divisible by m for Positive Integers

  • Thread starter Thread starter JasonJo
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The problem presented is to prove that for positive integers n and m, the expression n^m - n is divisible by m. Several approaches were discussed, including modular arithmetic and induction, but the initial attempts were flawed. A counterexample was provided, indicating that the statement is not universally true, specifically noting that 6 does not divide 2^6 - 2 = 62. The discussion suggests a potential connection to Fermat's Little Theorem, indicating that adjustments to the conditions on n and m may yield valid results.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of modular arithmetic
  • Familiarity with mathematical induction
  • Knowledge of binomial expansion
  • Basic concepts of number theory, particularly divisibility
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore Fermat's Little Theorem and its implications on divisibility
  • Study advanced techniques in mathematical induction
  • Research properties of binomial coefficients in number theory
  • Investigate counterexamples in mathematical proofs
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, educators, and anyone interested in number theory and proof techniques, particularly those exploring divisibility and modular arithmetic.

JasonJo
Messages
425
Reaction score
2
My teacher posed this as an extra credit problem on an exam, i couldn't quite prove it. I'm wondering if you guys could help me, i would really like to see the proof even though i already took the exam:

Prove that if n and m are positive integers, then n^m - n is divisible by m.

I took a few approaches:

I tried to pose the problem in mod m. so if n^m - n is divisible by m, then it'll be congruent to 0 mod m. so then i tried to induction on n, but i got stuck on the (k+1)^m expansion. I don't believe this is the correct way.

Another way I tried was to break it up into cases:
Case #1: m|n, then it must divide n^m - n
Case #2: m does not divide n. so then n = mq + r, where r is greater than zero and less than q. then I'm still stuck with a binomial expansion.

any help guys?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That's wrong as you've stated it. For example, 6 does not divide 2^6-2=62. But it looks similar to Fermat's little theorem, and you might get something valid if you changed some of the conditions on n and m.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K