Some help with a number theory problem

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter herraotic
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Number theory Theory
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a number theory problem involving integers a and b greater than 1, specifically the condition that for all n > 0, a^n - 1 divides b^n - 1. Participants are exploring whether this implies that b is a natural power of a, and they are seeking solutions or proofs related to this assertion.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that if a^n - 1 divides b^n - 1 for all n > 0, then b must be a natural power of a, but they struggle to find a proof.
  • Others argue that the original assertion may not hold, suggesting that the only conclusion that can be drawn is a | b, without further implications.
  • A participant questions the interpretation of the divisibility condition, suggesting that it might be misread and should be considered as (a^n) - 1 | (b^n) - 1.
  • There is a discussion about counterexamples, with some participants attempting to identify pairs of integers that satisfy the divisibility condition without being powers of each other.
  • Several participants express uncertainty about the implications of the problem and whether the converse is provable, indicating that proving the converse may be more complex.
  • Some participants mention the need to consider the greatest common divisor (gcd) of a and b in their reasoning.
  • There are references to previous discussions and solutions found online, suggesting that the problem has been previously posed and discussed in other forums.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the implications of the original condition. Multiple competing views remain regarding the validity of the assertion and the nature of potential counterexamples.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the problem may be more complex than initially thought, with references to its history in mathematical literature and previous discussions in other forums. There is also mention of the difficulty in proving the converse of the original statement.

  • #31
Since {b < a^{k+1}} and {deg(Q_k) < k+1}, the rightmost expression in (*) is bounded above by {1}
when {n} is sufficiently large. Thus {r_{k,n} = 0} for large {n}, since it is an integer.

For all large {n}, this yields
{b^n p_k + Q_k(a^n) = 0} and thus {p_k(b/a^k )^n + Q_k(a^n) /(a^n )^k = 0}.


This forces {p_k = 0}, since otherwise the left side is unbounded as {n\rightarrow +\infty}.
We now conclude that {Q_k(a^n) = 0} for all {n} and thus {Q_k} is the zero polynomial
and we are done.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
I have noticed a couple of misprints in the previous two posts. Unfortunately I can no longer edit them. No one has pointed out the misprints so hopefully they haven't caused too much confusion, but I have corrected them and combined the posts below.

Define a sequence {(Q_k)} of polynomials with {deg(Q_k) \leq k} by {Q_0 = -1}, and {Q_{k+1}(x) = a^{k+1}(x-1)Q_k(ax)-b(a^{k+1}x-1)Q_k(x)} for {k \geq 0}.

Observe that {Q_{k+1}(0) = (b - a^{k+1})Q_k(0)}. Iterating this and employing {Q_0 = -1} leads to {Q_k(0) = -(b - a^k )(b - a^{k-1} )...(b - a)}.

Assume that {b\neq a^j} for every non-negative integer {j}, so that {Q_k(0)\neq 0}. We will obtain a contradiction by identifying a {k} such that {Q_k} is identically {0}.

Let {r_{0,n} = (b^n - 1)/(a^n - 1)} for {n>0}. By assumption {r_{0,n}} is an integer.

For {k\geq 0} define {r_{k+1,n}} recursively by {r_{k+1,n}=a^{k+1}r_{k,n+1}-br_{k,n}}.

Let {p_0=1} and {{p_{k+1} = b(1 - a^{k+1} )p_k}}.

By induction on {k} it follows for {n \geq 1} and {k \geq 0} that

{r_{k,n}=[b^np_k + Q_k(a^n) ]/[(a^{n+k} - 1)(a^{n+k-1} - 1)...(a^n - 1)]}

Now fix {k} so that a^k<b<a^{k+1}. Since

(a^n-1)(a^{n+1}-1)\dots(a^{n+k}-1)=a^{n(k+1)}(1-a^{-n})(a-a^{-n})\dots(a^k-a^{-n})\geq a^{n(k+1)}/2

we see that

|r_{k,n}|\leq |b^np_k+Q_k(a^n)|/[a^{n(k+1)}/2]\leq 2(|p_k|(b/a^{k+1})^n+|Q_k(a^n)|/(a^n )^{k+1})\;\;(*)

Since {b < a^{k+1}} and {deg(Q_k) < k+1}, the rightmost expression in (*) is bounded above by {1} when {n} is sufficiently large. Thus {r_{k,n} = 0} for large {n}, since it is an integer.

For all large {n}, this yields {b^n p_k + Q_k(a^n) = 0} and thus {p_k(b/a^k )^n + Q_k(a^n) /(a^n )^k = 0}.

This forces {p_k = 0}, since otherwise the left side is unbounded as {n\rightarrow +\infty}. We now conclude that {Q_k(a^n) = 0} for all {n} and thus {Q_k} is the zero polynomial and we are done.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
992
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
48
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K