This discussion board is a place to discuss our Daily Challenges and the math and science
related to those challenges. Explanations are more than just a solution — they should
explain the steps and thinking strategies that you used to obtain the solution. Comments
should further the discussion of math and science.
When posting on Brilliant:
Use the emojis to react to an explanation, whether you're congratulating a job well done , or just really confused .
Ask specific questions about the challenge or the steps in somebody's explanation. Well-posed questions can add a lot to the discussion, but posting "I don't understand!" doesn't help anyone.
Try to contribute something new to the discussion, whether it is an extension, generalization or other idea related to the challenge.
Stay on topic — we're all here to learn more about math and science, not to hear about your favorite get-rich-quick scheme or current world events.
Markdown
Appears as
*italics* or _italics_
italics
**bold** or __bold__
bold
- bulleted - list
bulleted
list
1. numbered 2. list
numbered
list
Note: you must add a full line of space before and after lists for them to show up correctly
# I indented these lines
# 4 spaces, and now they show
# up as a code block.
print "hello world"
# I indented these lines
# 4 spaces, and now they show
# up as a code block.
print "hello world"
Math
Appears as
Remember to wrap math in \( ... \) or \[ ... \] to ensure proper formatting.
2 \times 3
2×3
2^{34}
234
a_{i-1}
ai−1
\frac{2}{3}
32
\sqrt{2}
2
\sum_{i=1}^3
∑i=13
\sin \theta
sinθ
\boxed{123}
123
Comments
I just proved number 3 in 3 seconds lol. Just Bertrand's Postulate that there exists a prime number from 2n to n if n is even or from 2n−1 to n−1 if n is odd.
For even number n, if p>2n, then 2p>n. Which means the next number that has a factor p doesn't exist in n,n−1,n−2,...,3,2,1 any more. So n! only have 1 factor of p and makes it not perfect square.
For odd number n, if p>2n−1, then 2p>n−1. Same as above, there exists only 1 factor p.
How about n? Can n have a factor of p? No. If 2p=n, then n is an odd number, which contradicts the given. So 2p>n or 2p<n.
For 2p>n, we're done. 2p doesn't exist in n,n−1,n−2,...,3,2,1 any more.
For 2p<n, since 2p>n−1, therefore 2p can't be integers, which contradicts the truth.
I agree with your q3 solution, it is very common in questions like these to use Bertrand's Postulate. In a moment I will post a very nice problem indeed.
q2 is very susceptible to induction (just simple induction, maybe with a contradiction element if you want to simplify things).
q1 is a very nice problem, as it combines techniques used in both q2 and q3 (use induction, with a contradiction, then use Bertrand's Postulate), so I thank you for these series of problems. If you want to know the problem I previously mentioned, just visit my page.
You can have a one-liner inductive proof of Problem 1) using Bertrand's postulate, which is a well known proven result in number theory.
The base case for n=3 is easy. Assume the assertion to hold good for an integer n≥3. Using this postulate, we have pn+1<pn+2<2pn+1=pn+1+pn+1<∑i=1n+1pi, where the last inequality follows from the induction assumption.
Easy Math Editor
This discussion board is a place to discuss our Daily Challenges and the math and science related to those challenges. Explanations are more than just a solution — they should explain the steps and thinking strategies that you used to obtain the solution. Comments should further the discussion of math and science.
When posting on Brilliant:
*italics*
or_italics_
**bold**
or__bold__
paragraph 1
paragraph 2
[example link](https://brilliant.org)
> This is a quote
\(
...\)
or\[
...\]
to ensure proper formatting.2 \times 3
2^{34}
a_{i-1}
\frac{2}{3}
\sqrt{2}
\sum_{i=1}^3
\sin \theta
\boxed{123}
Comments
I just proved number 3 in 3 seconds lol. Just Bertrand's Postulate that there exists a prime number from 2n to n if n is even or from 2n−1 to n−1 if n is odd.
For even number n, if p>2n, then 2p>n. Which means the next number that has a factor p doesn't exist in n,n−1,n−2,...,3,2,1 any more. So n! only have 1 factor of p and makes it not perfect square.
For odd number n, if p>2n−1, then 2p>n−1. Same as above, there exists only 1 factor p.
How about n? Can n have a factor of p? No. If 2p=n, then n is an odd number, which contradicts the given. So 2p>n or 2p<n.
For 2p>n, we're done. 2p doesn't exist in n,n−1,n−2,...,3,2,1 any more.
For 2p<n, since 2p>n−1, therefore 2p can't be integers, which contradicts the truth.
Therefore, n! can't be integers for any n>1.
I agree with your q3 solution, it is very common in questions like these to use Bertrand's Postulate. In a moment I will post a very nice problem indeed. q2 is very susceptible to induction (just simple induction, maybe with a contradiction element if you want to simplify things). q1 is a very nice problem, as it combines techniques used in both q2 and q3 (use induction, with a contradiction, then use Bertrand's Postulate), so I thank you for these series of problems. If you want to know the problem I previously mentioned, just visit my page.
You can have a one-liner inductive proof of Problem 1) using Bertrand's postulate, which is a well known proven result in number theory.
The base case for n=3 is easy. Assume the assertion to hold good for an integer n≥3. Using this postulate, we have pn+1<pn+2<2pn+1=pn+1+pn+1<∑i=1n+1pi, where the last inequality follows from the induction assumption.
Bertrand's Postulate