Give as much different solutions - 1

Find the number of solutions in positive integers m m and n n for the given equation.

2 m 3 n = 1 \large 2^m - 3^n = 1

1 3 2 Infinitely many 0

This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and, finally, (c) loading the non-javascript version of this page . We're sorry about the hassle.

3 solutions

Suppose n n is even. Then 3 n = ( 4 1 ) n 1 ( m o d 4 ) . 3^{n} = (4 - 1)^{n} \equiv 1 \pmod{4}.

So with 3 n = 4 k + 1 3^{n} = 4k + 1 for some non-negative integer k k we would require that

2 m ( 4 k + 1 ) = 1 2 m = 4 k + 2 = 2 ( 2 k + 1 ) 2 m 1 = 2 k + 1. 2^{m} - (4k + 1) = 1 \Longrightarrow 2^{m} = 4k + 2 = 2(2k + 1) \Longrightarrow 2^{m - 1} = 2k + 1.

The only odd power of 2 2 is 2 0 = 1 , 2^{0} = 1, so if n n is even we must have m = 1 , k = 0 , m = 1, k = 0, and thus n = 0 , n = 0, which does not satisfy the condition that m m be a positive integer.

Now suppose n n is odd. Then n = 2 k + 1 n = 2k + 1 for some non-negative integer k , k, and

3 n = 3 2 k + 1 = 3 9 k = 3 ( 8 + 1 ) k 3 ( m o d 8 ) . 3^{n} = 3^{2k + 1} = 3*9^{k} = 3*(8 + 1)^{k} \equiv 3 \pmod{8}.

So with 3 n = 8 d + 3 3^{n} = 8d + 3 for some non-negative integer d d we would require that

2 m ( 8 d + 3 ) = 1 2 m = 8 d + 4 = 4 ( 2 d + 1 ) 2 m 2 = 2 d + 1. 2^{m} - (8d + 3) = 1 \Longrightarrow 2^{m} = 8d + 4 = 4(2d + 1) \Longrightarrow 2^{m - 2} = 2d + 1.

Again, as the only odd power of 2 2 is 2 0 = 1 , 2^{0} = 1, if n n is odd we must have m = 2 , d = 0 , m = 2, d = 0, and thus n = 1. n = 1.

Having covered all the cases, we thus see that ( m , n ) = ( 2 , 1 ) (m,n) = (2,1) is the only solution pair satisfying the given conditions, and so the answer is 1 . \boxed{1}.

Note that an application of Catalan's conjecture , makes for a very short solution.

Brian Charlesworth - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

Haha yeah. Totally forgot about that theorem. Good solution +1

Pi Han Goh - 5 years, 6 months ago
Alan Yan
Nov 20, 2015

Taking mod 3 tells us that m m is even Let m = 2 k m = 2k . We have ( 2 k ) 2 3 n = 1 ( 2 k + 1 ) ( 2 k 1 ) = 3 n (2^k)^2 - 3^n = 1 \implies (2^k + 1)(2^k - 1) = 3^n Thus 2 k ± 1 2^k \pm 1 must both be powers of three. But the only powers of three that are different by 2 2 are 3 3 and 1 1 . Setting 2 k + 1 = 3 2 k 1 = 1 \begin{aligned} 2^k + 1 & = 3 \\ 2^k - 1 & = 1 \end{aligned} Gives us the unique solution of ( 2 , 1 ) (2, 1) .

Lu Chee Ket
Nov 20, 2015

2 m = 3 n + 1 2^m = 3^n + 1

2 1 = 3 0 + 1 2^1 = 3^0 + 1 {For non-negative integers}

2 2 = 3 1 + 1 2^2 = 3^1 + 1 {For positive integers}

When n>1, 3 n + 1 3^n + 1 can mostly be divided by 2 2 2^2 . The point is not 2 m 2^m .

This means that any 3 n + 1 3^n + 1 at far which shall not be checked if equals to 2 m 2^m cannot be true as two equal values must be divisible by 2 m 2^m of huge m rather than only a maximum of 4 (to an immediate limit using Excel).

Therefore, 2 2 = 3 1 + 1 2^2 = 3^1 + 1 is the only case valid for all positive integers of m and n.

Answer: 1 \boxed{1}

When n>1, 3 n + 1 3^n + 1 can mostly be divided by 2 2 2^2 .

You need to prove that this is true.

Pi Han Goh - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

3 n + 1 3^n + 1 :

4

28

244

2188

19684

177148

1594324

14348908

129140164

...

Lu Chee Ket - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

There's infinitely many integers of that form. You can't prove them all like that.

Pi Han Goh - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

@Pi Han Goh You can visualize the pattern from MOD 2 and MOD 4 for all 3 n + 1 3^n + 1 . Battery problem. I must cease for a while.

Lu Chee Ket - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

@Lu Chee Ket That's not a real proof. You need to prove that it's the case for all n. You have only shown that it's true for some values of n.

Pi Han Goh - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

@Pi Han Goh Think about 3 3 3 3 . . . + 1 3*3*3*3* ... + 1 . Then you should be able to visualize. Try with Excel!

Lu Chee Ket - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

@Lu Chee Ket That's not a proof. Why can't 3 x 3 x ... 3 x3 + 1 be divisible by 8 for some integer n?

Excel is not a valid proof.

Pi Han Goh - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

@Pi Han Goh 8 is in a stream of 2 x 2 x 2 but 3 x 3 x 3 x ... + 1 is in another stream. In other word, not easy to become even number but mostly up to a factor of 4.

Lu Chee Ket - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

@Lu Chee Ket That made no sense.

Pi Han Goh - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

@Pi Han Goh There are things worth for spending more time but there are also things that seem obvious that we don't gain from time utilized. I prefer an understanding via intuition than all sorts of mathematical expressions that may not be fundamental to me. I find that it makes sense to me.

Lu Chee Ket - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

@Lu Chee Ket @Lu Chee Ket: Draw circle and put a point on it. Obviously there is 1 area. Put two points on the circle and connect them. Obviously now you have split the circle into 2 areas. Put 3 points on the circle, connect them and you may have 4 areas.. Connecting 4 points leads you to have at most 8 areas. Now form a hypothesis and verify it for 5 points.

My question now: Can you have more than 31 areas with 6 points? If yes (no cheating!), post a picture of it, if no, try to find the error.

One reason, why the scientific method prevailed during the middle ages, was that it was so much more powerful than just believing and having faith.

Meer Kat - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

@Meer Kat I hope this is not a tool you have been using to treat everyone you think to a person like me. Since I presume you make me a special question or challenge, I would just take this as another opportunity for another question. But please give me some time so that I can feel comfortable to try when I am willing to spend the time later.

You can't equate this new question to imply incompleteness of the solution I provided. When you see using excel, you can get much more than just few terms. For all unseen huge numbers, 2 × 2 × 2 × 2 × . . . 2 2 \times 2 \times 2 \times 2 \times ... 2 just cannot coincide with something looked like a search for huge prime number such as 3 × 3 × 3 × 3 × . . . + 1 3 \times 3 \times 3 \times 3 \times ... +1 .

Lu Chee Ket - 5 years, 6 months ago

@Meer Kat To answer your question, I am sorry that I remember wrongly about what you wanted. Your question seems to have told that the answer have to be yes. All I can feel until now is it is possible. For even n like 6, regular polygon would give minimum amount, while for odd n like 7, regular polygon would give maximum amount seemingly. My pen is about to run out of ink. I haven't known how to use LATEX to draw. Therefore, I would like to guess that it is possible to draw a 6 points which is much away from being regular to get more than 31. So far, I think a general solution isn't seem easy to arrive with correct conclusion.

n up to 6, 7, or 8 are not considered sufficient for observing characteristic for predictions for cases like this. But what we should see for our original question is not only very few terms and the facts carried are much direct compared to your question.

The possibility is "obviously" decreasing to hit 2 m 2^m with 3 n + 1 3^n + 1 . Isn't this make sense to you? This indicates that we only need to check for the very front which is not as difficult as your question to hope to know for even a little bit more before conclusion is drawn from precise studies.

I find that we should not behave like a robot at thinking. Some questions worth for thinking into depth but some questions not.

Lu Chee Ket - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

@Jessica Wang To be humble and careful is always a reminder to me, so that we may believe and give an opportunity to correct our mistakes. However, I also find a good practice not to apply other question to prove or disprove unless necessary. Otherwise, we have to be guided into a lost of confidence onto everything we got scared by others. I can spend plenty of time onto one single mathematical question practically, when I think what I do is worthy. All my investigations brought about at least quite some important conclusions or precious fruits. Do you find that 1 is not the correct answer to this question?

To be equaled to 2 m , 2^m, 3 × 3 × 3 × 3 × . . . + 1 3 \times 3 \times 3 \times 3 \times ... + 1 ought to become 2 × 2 × 2 × 2 × . . . 2 2 \times 2 \times 2 \times 2 \times ... 2 exactly. How about a report saying that p n ± 1 p^n \pm 1 can easily be a prime number? Can't we JUST say that a prime number other than 2 cannot be formed by 2 m 2^m ? Our faith onto obvious justification is something we should believe in. Otherwise, we must get lost in the middle of an ocean even when we should be faithful to ourselves. Nevertheless, if you prove this answer to this question wrong, then I shall think this as a news to myself and we should let everyone to learn the new finding.

Lu Chee Ket - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

@Lu Chee Ket Don't place the burden of proof onto someone else. You're the one posting the solution, so you're the one who should post the relevant evidence to show that this problem is sound and have a correct and unique answer.

Pi Han Goh - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

@Pi Han Goh I am not putting the burden of proof onto someone else but I expect my readers to have an extend of self consciousness onto own strength because I am in a position to provide hints rather than to have a duty to let people to understand according strength of individual. You are not going to give reward to me aren't you? You are not an examiner to me, aren't you?

Obvious or not could be strength dependent onto each person. Have some gratitude and appreciate makes a reason for people to share answer to you.

Lu Chee Ket - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

@Lu Chee Ket You just said

Nevertheless, if you prove this answer to this question wrong, then I shall think this as a news to myself and we should let everyone to learn the new finding.

So you're placing the burden on Jessica Wang to find other solutions.

but I expect my readers to have an extend of self consciousness onto own strength because I am in a position to provide hints rather than to have a duty to let people to understand according strength of individual.

We are not mind readers. Your solution is not incomplete but completely wrong. So your solution is not a hint and you have misguided the users of this community.

You are not going to give reward to me aren't you?

What kind of reward you're looking for? A thumbs up? A congratulations speech?

You are not an examiner to me, aren't you?

No, I'm not. None of us are. We are here to help each other. Don't treat this site like some sort of exam hall.

Obvious or not could be strength dependence onto each person.

(Almost all) your solutions make "obvious" claims which are not obvious to begin with. Even if they are, you should explain why they are obvious (like by Trial and Error or by Rational Root Theorem, etc).

Have some gratitude and appreciate makes a reason for people to share answer to you.

What answer have you given? How is your solution helpful? Even high school (or elementary school) students can make a conjecture like "Oh it appears that 3^n + 1 can only be divided by 2 or 4 only! But I don't know why." Just because you've posted a solution, that doesn't make it helpful. You need to make sure the audience understand what you're talking about. Else it would be a complete waste. Must I remind you that you have posted a completely wrong solution before?

Pi Han Goh - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

@Pi Han Goh You haven't asked whether I agreed with you.

Lu Chee Ket - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

@Lu Chee Ket Here you go again: changing the topic to something irrelevant just to dodge the issue.

Pi Han Goh - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

@Pi Han Goh The conversation has already derailed. I vote for stopping this.

Meer Kat - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

@Meer Kat Yes agreed. I don't see a point to continuing this conversation. This Lu guy looks like the person in this picture.

Pi Han Goh - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

@Pi Han Goh I don't understand why you are just unfriendly to me from the beginning until now. I am very sad of this. But I don't find that this is my fault.

Lu Chee Ket - 5 years, 6 months ago

@Meer Kat You are going away from the original question. Please be reminded that people are not your slaves as you may have wanted.

Lu Chee Ket - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

@Lu Chee Ket From where did you get the assumption that he wanted people to be his slaves? I think he is trying to be kind to let you understand some things, which has been proven that you haven't understood any of them... If he was not from a good intention, then why should he spend time on talking to you? Please be reminded do not make assumptions and then conclude it is true without a logical reasoning.

Jessica Wang - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

@Jessica Wang I: "But please give me some time so that I can feel comfortable to try when I am willing to spend the time later."

He: "The conversation has already derailed. I vote for stopping this."

Two persons surprising attacking one. Hope not a third. Better not to involve, hard to understand sometime unless you do spend time. Never mind. Can we just close the case?

Lu Chee Ket - 5 years, 6 months ago

@Pi Han Goh You put this place as thought as an examination although you did not say it but you remind me not to treat this site as an examination hall. As you said an opposite, I feel that I am unwilling to answer your questions one by one. All I see is I did not agree that I posted a completely wrong solution.

Lu Chee Ket - 5 years, 6 months ago

May be more than 4 when the limit can be extended but we mean for 2 m 2^m where this is understood.

Lu Chee Ket - 5 years, 6 months ago

0 pending reports

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...