MATH 55 - HOMEWORK 6 SOLUTIONS

1. Section 5.1
Exercise 1.1. 4
Proof. (a) P (1) is the statement
 2
1·2
13 = .
2
(b) P (1) is true since
 2
1·2 2
= = 1 = 13 .
2 2
(c) The inductive hypothesis is P (n):
 2
n(n + 1)
13 + 23 + . . . + n3 = .
2
(d) Assuming the inductive hypothesis, we aim to show P (n + 1):
 2
(n + 1)(n + 2)
13 + 23 + . . . + n3 + (n + 1)3 = .
2
(e) Suppose n is such that
 2
3 3 3 n(n + 1)
1 + 2 + ... + n = .
2
Then by our inductive hypothesis, we have
 2
3 3 3 n(n + 1)
1 + . . . + n + (n + 1) = + (n + 1)3 .
2
Now we compute
2
n2 (n + 1)2

n(n + 1)
+ (n + 1)3 = + (n + 1)3
2 4
n2 (n + 1)2 4(n + 1)3
= +
4 4
(n2 + 4(n + 1))(n + 1)2
=
4
(n2 + 4n + 4)(n + 1)2
=
4
(n + 2)2 (n + 1)2
=
4
 2
(n + 1)(n + 2)
= .
2
This shows 2 
3 3 (n + 1)(n + 2)
3
1 + 2 + . . . + (n + 1) = .
2
(f) We showed P (1) and (∀n)(P (n) → P (n + 1)) by universal generalization. It follows by mathematical induction that
(∀n)P (n).

Exercise 1.2. 10
Proof. Notice we have
1 1
=
1·2 2
1 1 3 1 4 2
+ = + = =
1·2 2·3 2·3 2·3 6 3
1 1 1 3·4 4 2 18 3
+ + = + + = = .
1·2 2·3 3·4 2·3·4 2·3·4 2·3·4 24 4
1
2 MATH 55 - HOMEWORK 6 SOLUTIONS

From this, it seems reasonable to conjecture that for all n, P (n):

1 1 1 n
+ + ... + = .
1·2 2·3 n(n + 1) n+1
(b) Let’s prove it. P (1) was proven in (a). Now assume P (n) as the inductive hypothesis and let’s show P (n + 1):
1 1 1 1 n+1
+ + ... + + =
1·2 2·3 (n + 1)(n + 2) (n + 1)(n + 2) n+2
Now by the inductive hypothesis,
1 1 1 1 n 1
+ + ... + + = + .
1·2 2·3 n(n + 1) (n + 1)(n + 2) n + 1 (n + 1)(n + 2)
Now we calculate
n 1 n(n + 2) 1
+ = +
n + 1 (n + 1)(n + 2) (n + 1)(n + 2) (n + 1)(n + 2)
n2 + 2n + 1
=
(n + 1)(n + 2)
(n + 1)2
=
(n + 1)(n + 2)
(n + 1)
= .
(n + 2)
It follows that
1 1 1 1 n+1
+ + ... + + = ,
1·2 2·3 n(n + 1) (n + 1)(n + 2) n+2
which establishes P (n + 1). Therefore, by mathematical induction, P (n) is true for all positive integers n. 
Exercise 1.3. 19
Proof. (a) P (2) is the statement:
1 1
1+ <2− .
4 2
(b) P (2) is true as
1 5 6 3 1
1+ = < = =2− .
4 4 4 2 2
(c) The inductive hypothesis is P (n):
1 1 1
1++ ... + 2 < 2 − .
4 n n
(d) We need to prove, assuming the inductive hypothesis, that P (n + 1):
1 1 1 1
1+ + ... + 2 + <2− .
4 n (n + 1)2 n+1
(e) By the inductive hypothesis, we have
1 1 1 1 1
1+ + ... + + 2
<2− + .
4 n (n + 1) n (n + 1)2
An inequality we will find useful is that −(n + 1)2 + n < −n(n + 1). To see this, notice that
−(n + 1)2 + n = −n2 − 2n − 1 + n = −n2 − n − 1 < −n2 − n = −n(n + 1).
Using this inequality, we can establish P (n + 1), since
1 1 (n + 1)2 + n n(n + 1) 1
2− + = 2 − <2− =2− .
n (n + 1)2 n(n + 1)2 n(n + 1)2 n+1
(f) We showed P (2) and (∀n ≥ 2)[P (n) → P (n + 1)] by universal generalization. By mathematical induction, this establishes
(∀n)P (n). 
Exercise 1.4. 36
Proof. First we will prove this in the case n = 1. We need to show 21|41+1 + 52−1 . And this is true as 42 + 5 = 16 + 5 = 21
which is clearly divisible by 21.
Next we assume that n is such that 21|4n+1 + 52n−1 and we will aim to show 21|4n+2 + 52(n+1)−1 . Notice that
4n+2 + 52(n+1)−1 = 4 · 4n+1 + 25 · 52n−1 = 4 · 4n+1 + (4 + 21)52n−1 = 4(4n+1 + 52n−1 ) + 21 · 52n−1 .
 MATH 55 - HOMEWORK 6 SOLUTIONS 3

Now 21|4(4n+1 + 52n−1 ) as 21|(4n+1 + 52n−1 ) by the inductive hypothesis. Furthermore, 21 clearly divides 21 · 52n−1 . It
follows by the equation above that 21|4n+2 +52(n+1)−1 . Therefore, by mathematical induction, 21|4n+1 +52n−1 for all positive
integers n. 
Exercise 1.5. 49
Proof. The problem with this proof is in the inductive step. In particular, specializing to the case when k = 1, it is easy to
see that the proof is false: suppose you have a set of 2 = k + 1 horses. Then the set of the first k and the set of the last last
k horses - these are each just one horse! 
Exercise 1.6. 64
Proof. First, we make the following observation: if p is a prime, a and b are integers and p|ab then p|a or p|b. To see this,
consider the prime factorization of a and the prime factorization of b. The set of primes occuring in the prime factorization
of ab is the union of the primes occuring in the prime factorization of a and the prime factorization of b, thus p must appear
in the prime factorization of a or that of b.
Now we prove the statement by induction. The base case is trivial: if p|a1 then p|a1 . Now suppose that for any positive
integers a1 , . . . , an , if p|a1 . . . an then p|ai for some i. Then suppose a1 , . . . , an+1 are positive integers and p|a1 . . . an+1 . We
can think of the product a1 . . . an+1 as the product of a1 . . . an and an+1 . Then by our initial observation, either p|a1 . . . an
or p|an+1 . In the latter case, we’re done. In the former case, it follows from the induction hypothesis that p|ai for some
i = 1, . . . , n. This means we’ve shown that if p|a1 . . . an+1 then p|ai for some i = 1, . . . , n + 1. 

2. Section 5.2
Exercise 2.1. 4
Proof. (a) To see P (18), P (19), P (20), P (21), we just check:
18 = 2×7+4
19 = 3×4+7
20 = 5×4
21 = 3 × 7.
(b) The inductive hypothesis is that P (k) is true for all k satisfying 18 ≤ k ≤ n - i.e. k cent postage can be paid for with
only 4 and 7 cent stamps for all k between 18 and n (inclusive).
(c) In the inductive step, we need to show that if n is some number with 18 ≥ n and k cent postage can be paid for with
only 4 and 7 cent stamps for all k between 18 and n (inclusive), then n + 1 cent postage can be paid for using only 4 and 7
cent postage – formally, this says
P (18) ∧ P (19) ∧ . . . ∧ P (n) → P (n + 1).
(d) Suppose n ≥ 21 and P (k) holds for all k satisfying 18 ≤ k ≤ n. We want to show P (n + 1) is true. As n ≥ 21 we know
n + 1 ≥ 22. It follows that (n + 1) − 4 ≥ 18 and therefore by the inductive hypothesis, (n + 1) − 4 cent postage can be paid
for using only 4 and 7 cent stamps. Then adding one more 4 cent stamp gives postage for an n + 1 cent delivery.
(e) We established that P (18) is true and for all n, if P (k) is true for all k satisfying 18 ≤ k ≤ n then P (n + 1) is true. It
follows by strong induction that P (n) is true for all integers n ≥ 18. 
Exercise 2.2. 9
2
Proof. Let P (n) be the statement (∀b ∈ Z2 )( nb2 6= 2). First, we show P (1): if b is an arbitrary positive integer then 1b ≤ 1
and hence is not equal to 2 so P (1) is true.
Next suppose n is a number so that P (k) is true for all 1 ≤ k ≤ n. Then suppose towards contradiction that P (n + 1) is
2
false, i.e. there is a b ∈ Z+ so that (n+1)
b2 = 2. Then (n + 1)2 = 2b2 so (n + 1) is even – in other words, there is some positive
integer j so that 2j = n + 1. Notice that necessarily j < n + 1. Now we have
2b2 = (n + 1)2 = (2j)2 = 4j 2 ,
so b2 = 2j 2 , so b is also even. Write b = 2k. Now we have
 2  2  
n+1 2j j
2= = = .
b 2k k
2
This shows that there is a positive integer b - namely k - so that jb2 = 2 - in other words, P (j) is false. This contradicts our
assumption that P (k) is true for all k satisfying√1 ≤ k ≤ n. Therefore P√(n + 1) must be true. This completes the induction.
√
Now we explain why we may conclude that 2 is irrational. If not, 2 = pq for some integers p and q. Because 2 > 0,
2 √
we know p and q may be both taken to be positive integers. Then pq2 = 2 so P (p) must be false. But we proved P (p) so 2
is irrational. 
Exercise 2.3. 12
4 MATH 55 - HOMEWORK 6 SOLUTIONS

Proof. Note that P (1) is true as 1 = 20 .

Next, suppose n is such that P (k) is true for all 1 ≤ k ≤ n. We want to show n + 1 can be written as a sum of powers of 2.
If n + 1 is even then n+1
2 is a positive integer ≤ n. By the inductive hypothesis, there are nonnegative integers i1 < . . . < il
so that
(n + 1)
= 2i1 + 2i2 + . . . + 2il .
2
Then
n + 1 = 2(2i1 + 2i2 + . . . + 2il ) = 2i1 +1 + 2i2 +2 + . . . + 2il +1 ,
which shows n + 1 can be written as a sum of distinct powers of 2. If n + 1 is odd, then n is even so if we write (using the
inductive hypothesis)
n = 2i1 + 2i2 + . . . + 2il ,
then we know that ij ≥ 1 for all j (otherwise n would be odd). Hence

n + 1 = 1 + 2i1 + . . . + 2il = 20 + 2i1 + 2i2 + . . . + 2il ,

so n + 1 can be written as a sum of distinct powers of 2. 

Exercise 2.4. 14

Proof. Let P (n) be the predicate which asserts of n that the sum of the products computed after all the splittings is n(n−1)/2.
Note that P (1) is true as if there’s 1 pile of 1, you never split so you tally 0 products, which is expected by the formula
1(1 − 1)/2 = 0. Now suppose n is such that P (k) is true for all 1 ≤ k ≤ n.
Now suppose we’re given a pile of n + 1 stones. Consider any splitting of n + 1 into two piles of s and t stones respectively.
So s + t = n + 1. This splitting yields the product st. Any further splittings will be of the size s pile or the size t pile. So
the outcome of the tally will be st plus the sum of the splittings of the size s pile and the sum of the splittings of the size t
pile. By the inductive hypothesis, this yields a tally of
s(s − 1) t(t − 1)
st + + .
2 2
Now using that n + 1 = s + t and therefore that s + t − 1 = n, we compute
s(s − 1) t(t − 1) 2st + s(s − 1) + t(t − 1) st + st + s(s − 1) + t(t − 1)
st + + = =
2 2 2 2
s(s + t − 1) + t(s + t − 1)
=
2
(s + t)(s + t − 1)
=
2
n(n + 1)
= ,
2
which shows that P (n + 1) is true. Therefore, by strong induction, P (n) holds for all n. 

Exercise 2.5. 36

Proof. (a) The set S of positive integers of the form as + bt for integers s, t is non-empty: it contains, for example, a + b.
(b) S is a non-empty subset of Z+ therefore has a least element c.
(c) Write c = as + bt for some integers s, t. Then if d is a positive integer so that d|a and d|b, we can find α and β in Z+
so that αd = a and βd = b. Then (sα + tβ)d = (sαd + tβd) = (sa + tb) = c. This shows d|c.
(d) We will show c|a and c|b. Suppose c 6 |a. Then by Euclid’s algorithm, we can find an integer q and an integer r with
0 < r < c so that a = qc + r. Write c = sa + tb. Then

r = a − qc = a − qsa − qtb = (1 − qs)a + (−qt)b,

so r ∈ S. But c is the least element of S, a contradiction. So c|a. The argument that c|b is entirely similar.
(e) The solutions to (c) and (d) show that c has the property that it is a common divisor of a and b and any other common
divisor of a and b must also divide c – this shows that c is a greatest common divisor of a and b. To see that it is unique,
suppose c0 was another greatest common divisor of a and b. Since c0 divides a and b we know that c0 |c by (c), so 0 < c0 < c.
As c0 is a gcd of a and b, we may, by Bezout’s theorem, write c0 = sa + tb for some integers s and t. So c0 ∈ S. This
contradicts our assumption that c is least in S. Therefore c is unique with the property that c|a and c|b and for any common
divisor d of a and b, d|c. 
 MATH 55 - HOMEWORK 6 SOLUTIONS 5

3. Section 5.3
Exercise 3.1. 4
Proof. (a) f (n + 1) = f (n) − f (n − 1). So we compute
f (2) = f (1) − f (0) = 1 − 1 = 0
f (3) = f (2) − f (1) = 0 − 1 = −1
f (4) = f (3) − f (2) = −1 − 0 = −1
f (5) = f (4) − f (3) = −1 − (−1) = 0.
(b) f (n + 1) = f (n)f (n − 1). So we compute
f (2) = f (1)f (0) = 1
f (3) = f (2)f (1) = 1
f (4) = f (3)f (2) = 1
f (5) = f (4)f (3) = 1.
2 3
(c) f (n + 1) = f (n) + f (n − 1) . So we compute
f (2) = f (1)2 + f (0)3 = 2
f (3) = f (2)2 + f (1)3 = 5
f (4) = f (3)2 + f (2)3 = 33
f (5) = f (4)2 + f (3)3 = 1214.
(d) f (n + 1) = f (n)/f (n − 1). f (n + 1) = f (n)f (n − 1). So we compute
f (2) = f (1)/f (0) = 1
f (3) = f (2)/f (1) = 1
f (4) = f (3)/f (2) = 1
f (5) = f (4)/f (3) = 1.


Exercise 3.2. 6
Proof. (a) Valid. We’ll show f (n) = (−1)n . This works for n = 1 as (−1)0 = 1. Suppose for some fixed n, f (n) = (−1)n .
Then we have
f (n + 1) = −f (n) = (−1)(−1)n = (−1)n+1 ,
which proves, by induction, that f (n) = (−1)n for all n.
(b) Valid. We have
 k
 2 if n = 3k
f (n) = 0 if n = 3k + 1
 k+1
2 if 3k + 2.
Notice that, by Euclid’s algorithm, every nonnegative integer may be written n = 3k + i for i ∈ {0, 1, 2}, so this defines a
function with domain the nonnegative integers. Suppose it has been established that f (n) agrees with the above formula
for some n ≥ 2. Then consider the case of n + 1. Then n + 1 ≥ 3 so (n + 1) − 3 ≥ 0. If (n + 1) − 3 = 3k then we have
n + 1 = 3k + 3 = 3(k + 1) so we have
f (n + 1) = 2f (n + 1 − 3) = 2k+1
which agrees with the formula above. If n + 1 − 3 = 3k + 1 for some k then n + 1 = 3(k + 1) + 1 and f (n + 1) = 2 · f (n + 1 − 3) =
2 · 0 = 0 so agrees with the formula above. Finally, if n + 1 − 3 = 3k + 2 for some k, then n + 1 = 3(k + 1) + 2 and we have
f (n + 1) = 2 · f (n + 1 − 3) = 2 · 2k+1 = 2k+2 which agrees with the formula above. This finishes the argument.
(c) Not valid. The problem states the the function should have domain the set of nonnegative integers and range the
integers. The recursive definition f (n) = 2f (n + 1) is equivalent to the equation 21 f (n) = f (n + 1) and since f (1) = 1 this
implies f (2) = 12 which is not an integer.
(d) Not valid – if f (0) = 0 and f (n) = 2f (n − 1) for n ≥ 1 then f (1) = 0 but we’re told f (1) = 1.
(e) Not valid. Consider the case when n = 3. Then n is odd and ≥ 1 so f (3) = f (2). Then f (2) = 2f (0) = 4. So f (3) = 4.
But f (1) = f (0) = 2. Then f (4) = 2f (2) = 8.
Hence f (5) = f (4) = 8 and f (5) = 2f (3)
We claim  k+1
2 if x = 2k
f (x) =
2k+1 if x = 2k + 1.
6 MATH 55 - HOMEWORK 6 SOLUTIONS

x
In other words, f (x) = 2b 2 c+1 . As f (0) = 0, this formula works for n = 0. Suppose n is such that f (k) agrees with the above
formula for all k ≤ n, and we’ll prove it for n + 1. If n + 1 is odd, then b n+1 n
2 c = b 2 c so f (n + 1) = f (n) and this agrees with
n+1 n−1
b 2 c+1
the above formula. Furthermore, if n + 1 ≥ 2 then b n+1 n−1
2 c = b 2 c so 2 = 2 · 2b 2 c+1 = f (n − 1) so if n + 1 ≥ 2 then
f (n + 1) = 2f (n − 1) and this agrees with the above formula. 
Exercise 3.3. 8
Proof. (a) a1 = 2 and an+1 = 4 + an .
(b) a1 = 0 and a2 = 2 and an = an−2 for n ≥ 2.
(c) a1 = 2 and an+1 = (n+2)a
n
n
.
(d) a1 = 1 and an+1 = an + 2n + 1. 
Exercise 3.4. 12
Proof. We want to show that f12 + . . . + fn2 = fn fn+1 where fn denotes the nth Fibonacci number. For n = 1, this is true as
f1 = f2 = 1 so f12 = 12 = f1 f2 . Now suppose it’s been shown for n and we’ll prove it for n + 1. By the inductive hypothesis,
we have
f12 + f22 + . . . + fn2 + fn+1
2 2
= fn fn+1 + fn+1 .
Then we note that fn + fn+1 = fn+2 by definition of the Fibonacci sequence. This entails
2
fn fn+1 + fn+1 = fn+1 (fn + fn+1 ) = fn+1 fn+2 ,
which completes the induction step. 
Exercise 3.5. 14
Proof. We want to show fn+1 fn−1 − fn2 = (−1)n . For n = 2 this is true as f3 = 3 and f2 = f1 = 1 so f3 f1 − f22 = 2 − 1 =
1 = (−1)2 . Now suppose it has been established for n and we will show it’s true for n + 1. Using that fn+2 = fn+1 + fn and
fn+1 = fn + fn−1 , we have
2 2
fn+2 fn − fn+1 = (fn+1 + fn )fn − fn+1
= fn2 + fn fn+1 − fn+1
2

= fn2 − fn+1 (fn+1 − fn )

= fn2 − fn+1 fn−1
= −(fn+1 fn−1 − fn2 ).
So by the induction hypothesis, we have
2
fn+2 fn − fn+1 = −(fn+1 fn−1 − fn2 ) = (−1)(−1)n = (−1)n+1 .
This completes the induction step. 
Exercise 3.6. 20
Proof. Now we define max(a1 ) = a1 and max(a1 , a2 ) by

a1 if a1 ≥ a2
max(a1 , a2 ) =
a2 otherwise.
Then we set max(a1 , . . . , an+1 ) = max(max(a1 , . . . , an ), an+1 ).
Similarly we define min a1 = a1 and min(a1 , a2 ) by

a1 if a1 ≤ a2
min(a1 , a2 ) =
a2 otherwise.
Then we define min(a1 , . . . , an+1 ) = min(min(a1 , . . . , an ), an+1 ).