Proving Divisibility: Solving ##1900^{1990} - 1## with the Power Rule

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves proving that ##1900^{1990} - 1## is divisible by ##1991##. The subject area relates to number theory and divisibility rules.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to factor the expression using the formula for differences of powers but expresses uncertainty about the next steps, particularly regarding the divisibility of ##1899## by ##1991##. Some participants question whether the problem statement might contain an error regarding the intended divisor, suggesting it could be ##1901## instead.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring different interpretations of the problem and questioning the validity of the original statement. There is no explicit consensus, but some guidance has been offered regarding the factorization approach.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the potential for confusion in the problem statement, particularly regarding the numbers involved and their relationships, which may affect the approach to proving divisibility.

IDValour
Messages
25
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement



Prove that ##1900^{1990} - 1## is divisible by ##1991##

Homework Equations



##x^n - 1 = (x - 1)(x^{n-1} + x^{n-2} + ... + 1)##

The Attempt at a Solution


[/B]
Quite naturally the first step I took was to attempt the factorisation and see what that got me:

##1900^{1990} - 1 = (1900 - 1)(1900^{1989} + 1900^{1988} + ... + 1)##

And from here I somewhat fail to see where to go forward.

##1899## is not divisible by ##1991## so do I need to work on the second part? If so I am having trouble seeing how to resolve it. It does seems possible to factorise the problem down to ##(19*100)^{1990} - 1## but then again this seems highly irrelevant.

Any help on this issue would be greatly appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Try x = -1900.

Edit: Sorry, I read divisible by 1901.
 
To be honest with you, I'm beginning to think that there may have been an error and that the question was intended to read as divisible by 1901 instead of 1991. Either that or with the 1990 and 1900 swapped.
 
This might not be an unreasonable assumption. Had 1991 been a prime number you might have been able to apply Fermat's little theorem, but alas 1991 = 11*181 ...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K