1 is divisible by 1.
2
×
3
is divisible by 2.
4
×
5
×
6
is divisible by 3.
7
×
8
×
9
×
1
0
is divisible by 4.
1
1
×
1
2
×
1
3
×
1
4
×
1
5
is divisible by 5.
True or False?
The product of any N consecutive integers must be divisible by N .
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.
Yes, or can we conclude it to Pigeonhole Theorem?
Log in to reply
I suppose that the Dirichlet principle (pigeon hole) can be used to prove this result using modular arithmetic, but there is no need to make it more complicated than my above solution
Log in to reply
Doesn't the pigeonhole theorem is equivalent to your solution? I thought is the same.
Log in to reply
@Kelvin Hong – The pigeon hole theorem is a method for solving combinatorical problems. My solution can be proved using this theorem, but I wouldn't say they are equivalent
Log in to reply
@Stephen Mellor – Actually your solution does follow from the pigeonhole principle.
Assume that the statement "Out of any n consecutive numbers,one must be divisible by n " is false.
This implies that all of the n consecutive numbers have non-zero remainders upon division by n .But there are n − 1 possible non-zero remainders.
Therefore there are two numbers A , B in this list such that they have the same remainder upon division by n .Name the remainder as x .
However,when you increase a number by 1,the remainder increases by 1 as well.So,since the remainder is never decreasing,the only way two numbers in this list of n consecutive numbers could have the same remainder upon division by n is if the remainders "looped around" and eventually reached x again from below.
But in order to loop around,the list of remainders of all these numbers must have gone through 0 as well,which is an immediate contradiction to our initial assumption!
Hence proved.
Just out of curiosity, What if one of the numbers was zero?
Log in to reply
Then the product would be 0. Any number can divide 0, so no problem.
Note that there would arise a problem if we were dividing by zero, but in the context of the problem this makes no sense as you can't have the product of 0 numbers
No, N must be non-zero
Log in to reply
How do you work that out?
Log in to reply
If N was zero, you would be taking the product of 0 numbers which makes no sense
Log in to reply
@Stephen Mellor – Actually it does make sense - the product of 0 numbers is always 1, the multiplicative identity. A consequence of this is that 0 ! = 1 .
Just realised that this is indeed a flaw, since 1 isn't divisible by 0. So we need a proviso that N > 0 .
Yes, otherwise it will be meaningless.
The statement does not exclude non-positive integers (a notable flaw). So a series “-1, 0, 1, 2” disproves the statement. Most people are answering correctly the question they wanted to be asked (positive integers), not the actual one stated.
Log in to reply
Care to explain how your series disproves the statement?
-1,0,1,2 = 4 numbers ( N = 4 )
− 1 × 0 × 1 × 2 = 0
0 / 4 = 0 (which is an integer)
This works for negative number sequences or positive number sequences but not for sequences including zero.
Log in to reply
See Simon Mitchell's comment, and my reply to him
set of integers include 0, the negative, and the positive natural numbers. Answer is true only if N is non-zero.
Answered false got the question wrong
Yes, I almost answered false before I remembered this. My dad once asked me to find primes that were 3 consecutive odd numbers, like 3, 5, 7. I couldn't, but when I was told why I understood.That reminded me of this rule.
The product of any N consecutive integers not only divisible by N , but also divisible by N ! .
Proof: Let the N positive consecutive integers as k + 1 , k + 2 , … , k + ( N − 1 ) , k + N . Consider the integer ( k k + N ) , which is a i n t e g e r . = = ( k k + N ) k ! × N ! ( k + N ) ! N ! ( k + 1 ) × ( k + 2 ) × … × ( k + ( N − 1 ) ) × ( k + N ) This imply that N ! ( k + 1 ) × ( k + 2 ) × … × ( k + ( N − 1 ) ) × ( k + N ) is also an integer, which means that N ! ∣ [ ( k + 1 ) × ( k + 2 ) × … × ( k + ( N − 1 ) ) × ( k + N ) ]
For product of N consecutive negative integers, we just need to take out the negative signs of them, and we will get a number which is product of N consecutive positive integers with negative sign or maybe not. As the negative sign doesn't affect the divisibility, we can conclude that it must me divisible by N ! . If the N consecutive number include positive integers and negative integers, then it must include 0 , so the product is equal to 0 , which is divisible by any N ! .
The Classic Proof!
Your proof is almost correct, but you need to show this holds true for negative integers, not just non-negative.
Log in to reply
Yah, forget already, Thanks!
Ooo. Nice point. I overlooked.
We must recognize first that─
The product of N consecutive integers is divisible by N if and only if at least one of N consecutive integers is divisible by N .
Let a + 1 , a + 2 , … … … , a + N be N consecutive integers with a is an integer.
Let's assume that none of ( a + k ) with ( 1 ≤ k ≤ N ) is divisible by N . So, there remain ( N − 1 ) possible remainders, namely, 1 , 2 , 3 , … … … , N − 1 , for N integers ( a + k ) when divided by N .
( N − 1 ) possible remainders for N integers. So, by the Pigeonhole Principle , at least two of numbers ( a + k ) will share the same remainder when divided by N .
Let's assume that ( a + i ) and ( a + j ) give same remainder when divided by N , with 1 ≤ i < j ≤ N . So, ( a + j ) − ( a + i ) = ( j − i ) is divisible by N . But as 1 ≤ i < j ≤ N , so, 1 ≤ ( j − i ) < N . So, j − i cannot be divisible by N . Therefore, assuming none of N consecutive integers is divisible by N leads to a contradiction.
So, YES , The product of N consecutive integers is divisible by N .
I really am trying to understand this but I'm struggling to grasp some of the concepts at the end could you explain them further.
Log in to reply
From exactly which point, you are facing difficulty, please?
I guess it's important to remember that zero is divisible by any integer, so that -1 x 0 x 1 = 0 which is divisible by 3.
If you're clueless start with simpler problem. Why should product of any two consecutive positive integers be divisible by 2?
In the product of N consecutive integers, one of them must have N as its factor.
Hence the product of any N consecutive integers is always divisible by N .
{5,6,7} doesn't contain number 3. "Product of N consecutive positive integers must have N as its prime factor" this what you probably meant.
Log in to reply
Yes it does, 6 is 2x3(in this case 3 is your N), Munem is right
Log in to reply
Maybe he should have written "N as one of its factors" but i think what he means is quite clear
11x12x13x14x15 is the same as 11x12x13x14x3x5, which is divisible by 5
1 is divisible by 1.
2 × 3 is divisible by 2.
4 × 5 × 6 is divisible by 3.
7 × 8 × 9 × 1 0 is divisible by 4.
1 1 × 1 2 × 1 3 × 1 4 × 1 5 is divisible by 5.
Show ∏ j = 0 n − 1 ( n + 2 ( n − 2 ) ( n − 1 ) + j ) = n ∗ k for some integer k .
For n odd the last term of the above product is p n − 1 = 2 n ( n + 1 ) = n ∗ k ⟹ n is a factor of the product for n odd.
For n even the 2 n − 2 term of the above product is p 2 n − 2 = 2 n 2 = n ∗ ( 2 n ) = n ∗ k ∗ ⟹ n is a factor of the product for n even.
∴ n is a factor of the product ∏ j = 0 n − 1 ( n + 2 ( n − 2 ) ( n − 1 ) + j ) for every positive integer n .
Note: The product can be written backwards as ∏ j = 0 n − 1 2 ( n ) ( n + 1 ) − j from which you can see that for n even j = 2 n ⟹ p ( 2 n ) = 2 n 2 = n ∗ ( 2 n ) = n ∗ k ∗ and for n odd j = 0 ⟹ p 0 = 2 n ( n + 1 ) = n ∗ ( 2 n + 1 ) = n ∗ k .
Since 3 has its multiple after every 3 number So if you choose any 3 consecutive numbers , then there will definitely exist one multiple of 3.
And the same happens with every no. other than 3. Hence it's true
That is exactly what the problem is asking you to verify! :P
Since one factor is 1 5 (and 1 5 is divisible by 5 ), the product is divisible by 5 .
This does not hold if zero, which is an integer , is included in the series.
0 x 1 x 2 = 2, which is not divisible by 3.
0 x 1 x 2 x 3 = 6, which is not divisible by 4, etc
0 x anything is 0 which is divisible by any number.
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
Quite simply,
If you have n consecutive numbers, one of them must be a multiple of n (as multiples of n occur every n integers)