Another method, simpler. Move the 9 right and factorise both sides, where RHS starts as m^2. (p-2)p(p+2) = (m+3)(m-3) If p=2 then LHS is zero so m=3. One solution. If p>2 then LHS is product of 3 consecutive odd numbers, exactly one of which must be a multiple of 3. So RHS is a multiple of 3 so m is a multiple of 3. In which case we factor out 3 from both RHS factors. With m=3k: (p-2)p(p+2) = 9(k+1)(k-1) As the 9 must be absorbed by one of the LHS factors and the other RHS factors are consecutive odd numbers, there is a 1:1 mapping of the 3 factors each side. p is prime so one of the other LHS factors must equal 9. This gives us two more solutions: (2) p-2 = 9, so p=11, m=36 (3) p+2 = 9, so p = 7, m=18.
@tianqilong83662 жыл бұрын
but you need to show that why (p+2) and (p-2) cannot be a multiplier of 3, right?
@bait66522 жыл бұрын
No
@dqrk02 жыл бұрын
@@tianqilong8366 its obvious, if p-2 is a multiple of 3, then (p-2)+3=p+1 is a multiple of 3 so p+2 cannot be and similarly for the other case
@wesleydeng712 жыл бұрын
Nice. p=2 does not need to be a special case since 3 | (p-2)p(p+2) is always true.
@Szynkaa2 жыл бұрын
and what if k+1 or k-1 are also divisible by 3
@mcwulf252 жыл бұрын
If anyone is interested, I can now prove my solution from a few days ago. It starts with saying that if p|(k-1) then mp= (k-1) and mp+2 = (k+1). Plug it all in and cancel p and form a quadratic in p. The discriminant is 81m^4 + 72m + 16 which must be a perfect square. This is always> m^4 for m>1 and if m>4 it is < (m^2+1)^2 so, as this is between squares of consecutive integers, no solutions for m>4. Test for m
@spiderjerusalem4009 Жыл бұрын
also that p≡3 mod 4 only, because p³-4p+9 is even (for p>2) meaning either ≡ 0 or 2 (mod 4), but for it to be perfect square, then must be congruent to 0(mod4) p³+1 ≡ 0 (mod 4) p ≡ -1 ≡ 3(mod 4)
@keithmasumoto96982 жыл бұрын
125-20+9=114, so p=5 is also ruled out.
@moeberry82262 жыл бұрын
You forgot to test p=5
@graham7417 ай бұрын
LHS must be even assuming it's not an even prime (but p=2 works too) so then RHS is odd, meaning it's congruent to 0 mod 4. Therefore p^3 + 1 = 0 mod 4 so p must be 3 mod 4, and primes must be 1 or 5 mod 6, so then p must be 11 or 7 mod 12. The only primes generated by this are 7,11,19,23,31, and 43 and checking yields p = 7,11 (it's annoying if you don't have a calculator but very doable with some mod checks + divisibility checks, eg if it's congruent to 0 modulo by n and not n^2 where n is not a perfect square then it cannot be a perfect square)
@todddean77222 жыл бұрын
I think you lost me at 3:30 to 3:50.
@mariomestre74902 жыл бұрын
why change +-6k-4 , in 6k+-4? in 2:39. Merci
@piiscongruentto1modk4 ай бұрын
I believe it was an error
@wonjonghyeon2 жыл бұрын
Where has the condition that p is greater than or equal to 5 gone?
@fix50722 жыл бұрын
He ruled out p=2, 3 first, then got a bound on all p>3 and then checked all possible p (2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13)
@papanujian7758 Жыл бұрын
oh i seee. thanks@@fix5072
@iainfulton37812 жыл бұрын
Turn on postifications
@vvvppp7772 жыл бұрын
why did you take mod p at the start?
@prathikkannan33242 жыл бұрын
It's a very common strategy. Once you see plenty of olympiad number theory problems, taking mod p is immediately obvious. In short, we like to simplify things, whether that means get some information on "x", create some bounds, or collapse into an easier equation to deal with, and reduction modulo n gives us these simplifications :)
@papanujian7758 Жыл бұрын
wishing your new video, sir
@tianqilong83662 жыл бұрын
Is it supposed to be +-6k + 4 instead of 6k +- 4 ??
@de_michael12222 жыл бұрын
what he wrote is equivalent
@lakshya59462 жыл бұрын
Hmm 🤔🧐 I'm also interested to see the answer 😌
@SuperYoonHo2 жыл бұрын
thanks!!!
@iainfulton37812 жыл бұрын
You skipped p = 5 ffs
@anjanavabiswas88352 жыл бұрын
I read the question as p^3 + 4p + 9 = perfect square. :(
@nasrullahhusnan22892 жыл бұрын
Trivial solutions are p=0 and p=2. As p is a prime number then p=2