[HN Gopher] Where do those undergraduate divisibility problems c...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Where do those undergraduate divisibility problems come from?
        
       Author : mathgenius
       Score  : 157 points
       Date   : 2025-01-20 09:41 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (grossack.site)
 (TXT) w3m dump (grossack.site)
        
       | jmount wrote:
       | More on integer valued polynomials:
       | https://cameroncounts.wordpress.com/2017/01/31/polynomials-t...
        
         | svat wrote:
         | That blog post is specifically about the question about whether
         | a polynomial taking integer values on positive integers (or any
         | sufficiently large subset thereof) necessarily is an integer-
         | valued polynomial (the answer is yes).
         | 
         | The OP blog post here actually links to / points out there's an
         | Wikipedia article on integer-valued polynomials:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integer-valued_polynomial
         | 
         | Among other things, as mentioned, "every integer-valued
         | polynomial can be written as an integer linear combination of
         | binomial coefficients" [in exactly one way].
         | 
         | The conjecture in the OP post, that every polynomial everywhere
         | divisible by k counts {something}, is intriguing, and I
         | wouldn't be surprised if it were true.
        
       | dang wrote:
       | [stub for offtopicness]
        
         | mjd wrote:
         | I feel silly saying this, but I wish the author would use more
         | periods and fewer exclamation marks.
        
           | tromp wrote:
           | Elaine Benes would be proud of their writing...
        
             | leetcrew wrote:
             | I was in the pool!
        
           | gazchop wrote:
           | Oh this is nothing. One of my colleagues does that and adds
           | random colour changes, underlines and font face changes. It's
           | like working with a serial killer.
        
             | gota wrote:
             | Maybe he was a teenager on IRC in the late 90s or early 00s
             | and decided to never change
             | 
             | Thinking about it I guess MSN messenger and My Space also
             | allowed/encouraged font shenanigans? My memory falters
        
               | andrepd wrote:
               | Ahh. I honestly miss that amount of self-expression,
               | garish as it was. Or rather, I intensely dislike the
               | mono-culture where every vertical video with one-word
               | subtitles looks the same.
        
           | amne wrote:
           | You're the second commenter, so far, to mention exclamation
           | marks. What do they mean to you that would bother you so much
           | to point it out, or anyone for that matter? I haven't even
           | noticed them until I read the comments here on hn.
        
             | micaeked wrote:
             | Not gp, but I feel similarly. For me, I can't help read it
             | with emphasis. As in, the voice in my head gets all fancy
             | in an annoying way. If you imagine someone in person
             | reading it out-loud with exaggerated emphasis, that's what
             | it feels like. Same thing with comic books for me, the
             | sprinkled bolded words in dialog are really grating.
        
             | Etheryte wrote:
             | To me it's fairly similar to someone making excessive use
             | of CAPS LOCK. It can be used as a stylistic choice at
             | times, but use it TOO MUCH and it just becomes DISTRACTING.
        
             | Minor49er wrote:
             | I DON'T SEE A PROBLEM WITH THIS EITHER! BUT I EMPATHIZE! I
             | GET COMMENTS FROM PEOPLE SAYING THAT I'M SOMEHOW YELLING AT
             | THEM ALL THE TIME BUT I'M ACTUALLY SITTING IN SILENCE,
             | TYPING QUIETLY ON A MEMBRANE KEYBOARD! LOL???
        
       | np_tedious wrote:
       | Well I was curious, but there's a lot there I didn't understand.
       | Apparently I'm good enough at math to do the proofs, but not to
       | write the exercises.
       | 
       | Exercise left to the reader:
       | 
       | Prove 7*n^3 + n is divisible by 2
        
         | abnry wrote:
         | 7 _n^3 +n (mod 2) = 1_ n^3 + n = n + n = 2*n = 0*n = 0
        
         | BurningFrog wrote:
         | 7*n^3 is even when n is even and odd otherwise.
         | 
         | odd + odd is even, as is even + even.
        
           | Spivak wrote:
           | The easy way of seeing the first part is to do the prime
           | factorization. The 7 doesn't matter since it's prime. If n
           | has a 2 in its factorization it now has 2^3. But if it
           | doesn't have a 2 it won't suddenly acquire one.
           | 
           | All the symbol soup proofs aren't wrong but I don't think
           | they satisfyingly explain the why.
        
             | thaumasiotes wrote:
             | All of these "always divisible by n" proofs are asking you
             | to solve them case by case in modular arithmetic.
             | 
             | For divisibility by two, there are only two cases. So if n
             | is 1, then n3 is 1, and if n is 0, n3 is 0. 0+0 = 0; 1+1 =
             | 0; and this completes the proof.
             | 
             | I am not actually sure that doing a prime factorization on
             | 7n3 for unknown n is easier than knowing that 13 = 1.
        
           | crabbone wrote:
           | I vote this the best proof. All you need to know to
           | understand it is to know how multiplication, addition and
           | exponentiation works. You could probably show this to a child
           | in a sixth grade or so, and have them understand it. This is
           | really good!
        
         | cherryteastain wrote:
         | Given p(n) = 7n^3 + n:
         | 
         | If n is even, we can choose some m such that n = 2m, and p(n) =
         | p(2m) = 7 * 8m^3 + 2m = 2 * (7 * 4m^3 + m), which is divisible
         | by 2 since we could factor out the 2 at the start.
         | 
         | If n is odd, similarly we can say n = 2m + 1. p(2m) = 7 * (2m +
         | 1)^3 + (2m + 1) = 56m^3 + 84m^2 + 44m + 8 = 2 * (28m^3 + 42m^2
         | + 22m + 4), which is also divisible by 2 per the 2 at the
         | start.
        
         | MichaelRo wrote:
         | >> Apparently I'm good enough at math to do the proofs, but not
         | to write the exercises.
         | 
         | Took a look on it, seems like a highly particular / specialized
         | area of mathematics. It's like computer science, can't know
         | them all. If you work all day with some area, say compilers or
         | databases or financial software or what else, you'd be a whizz
         | at it while it's unreasonable to expect someone from a
         | different domain be able of more than a superficial
         | understanding of what you write.
         | 
         | I'm pretty good at math but like with computers, I don't have
         | the compulsion to dive deep into an unfamiliar domain just for
         | the sake of it. So commenting on the article: cool, now I know
         | how these problems are formed and in the very unlikely domain
         | I'll need to produce one, I know where to look. Likely this
         | will never happen, though.
        
           | dleeftink wrote:
           | > seems like a highly particular / specialized area of
           | mathematics. It's like computer science, can't know them all
           | 
           | As a non-mathy, I'm interested in whether the _idea_ that
           | being good /able to provide proofs in one area, automagically
           | makes one proficient in another is customary in the field or
           | rejected quite early on when choosing a math specialisation?
        
             | svat wrote:
             | It is not typical that being good in one area of
             | mathematics makes one proficient in another -- mathematics
             | has a lot of depth, and to reach the frontier in any
             | specialization requires years of study. However:
             | 
             | - There are skills that carry over; these are usually known
             | by the name "mathematical maturity" https://en.wikipedia.or
             | g/w/index.php?title=Mathematical_matu...
             | 
             | - There is a story/legend told about Erdos, where he was so
             | good at problem-solving/proofs that he once solved a
             | problem in another area after asking for the definitions of
             | the terms in the problem. (The fact that this story is told
             | illustrates that it is not commonplace.)
        
             | MichaelRo wrote:
             | Well there is common stuff that one must be familiar with
             | to be proficient and marginal stuff that you can get by
             | without knowing because chances is you're not going to need
             | it.
             | 
             | Like take for instance financial mathematics where I had
             | some special interest, it's totally oblivious to areas such
             | as geometry or number theory. I never had to figure out if
             | a polynomial is divisible by 6 for instance :)
             | 
             | Like computer science, there's the common algorithms stuff
             | but being an expert in web development doesn't help you
             | much in writing high frequency trading server code, and the
             | other way around.
        
         | dh2022 wrote:
         | n = 0 or 1 modulo 2. So we have to check out only two cases
         | module 2, and these cases trivial. To prove the problem note
         | that 6 = 2 * 3 and then is trivial to see that the polynomial
         | is=0 modulo 2 if n=0,1 modulo 6and then check it is =0 modulo 3
         | for n=0,1,2 modulo 3 and you are done.
        
         | deruta wrote:
         | And a proof by "counting _something_ ":
         | 
         | 1 + 2 + ... + n = n(n+1)/2
         | 
         | 2 divides n(n+1), n(n+1) = 2m
         | 
         | 7 * n^3 + n =
         | 
         | 2*(3*n^3 + n) + n^3 - n =
         | 
         | 2*(3*n^3 + n) + n(n+1)(n-1) =
         | 
         | 2*(3*n^3 + n + m(n-1))
        
         | svat wrote:
         | > _but not to write the exercises_
         | 
         | As the post mentions in passing, the integer-valued polynomials
         | are completely characterized by the property that when written
         | as a sum of {c_i (x choose i)}, all the coefficients c_i are
         | integers. I imagine this is where most of the exercises
         | _actually_ come from. For example, using [3 1 4 1 5 9], the
         | polynomial {3 + 1*x + 4*x(x-1) /2 + 1*x(x-1)(x-2)/6 +
         | 5*x(x-1)(x-2)(x-3)/24 + 9*x(x-1)(x-2)(x-3)(x-4)/120} simplifies
         | to 1/120 (9x^5 - 65x^4 + 185x^3 + 5x^2 - 14x + 360), so you
         | could use it to generate exercises like:
         | 
         | - Prove that 9x^5 - 65x^4 + 185x^3 + 5x^2 - 14x + 360 is always
         | a multiple of 120
         | 
         | (or 5, or any divisor of 120).
        
       | t43562 wrote:
       | My daily dose of inferiority: done. :-) Perfect sentences which
       | are complete gobblede-gook to me.
        
       | agnishom wrote:
       | TLDR Summary:
       | 
       | There is a genre of undergraduate polynomial divisibility
       | problems which look like this: Show that f(n) is divisible by
       | some integer k.
       | 
       | These problems often appear to be (elementary) number theory
       | problems. However, often there is a rather elegant proof
       | associated with them which is based on combinatorics.
       | 
       | The crux of this proof is that the polynomial counts the number
       | of equivalence classes of a certain kind.
       | 
       | This is closely related to
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burnside%27s_lemma
       | 
       | The question at the end of the post is whether _all_ such
       | problems must come this way
        
       | daef wrote:
       | i couldnt come up with a proof for the initial problem
       | (n^6+n^3+2n^2 is a multiple of 6 for every n)
       | 
       | because it's not true (simply insert 1, 2, 4 or 5)
        
         | goldencoralefan wrote:
         | You're missing a term: n^6+n^3+2n^2+2n
        
       | nh23423fefe wrote:
       | i just computed the solution mod 2 and mod 3 a la chinese
       | remainder theorem
       | 
       | the polynomial is =0 mod2 and =0 mod3 so its =0 mod6
       | 
       | n^6 + n^3 + 2n^2 + 2n (mod 2) = n^6 + n^3 + 0 + 0 = n^3(n^3+1) =
       | 0*1 or 1*0 = 0
       | 
       | because consecutive numbers are even then odd then even ....
       | 
       | for mod3 you can make a table
       | 
       | you could also factor the polynomial and see the solution easily
       | 
       | n(n+1)(n^2-2n+2)(n^2+n+1)
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-01-21 23:03 UTC)