How To Prove It A Structured Approach - (Introduction)
How To Prove It A Structured Approach - (Introduction)
puzzled about why the steps are combined in the way they are, or how anyone
could have thought of the proof. If so, we ask you to be patient. Many of these
questions will be answered later in this book, particularly in Chapter 3.
All of our examples of proofs in this introduction will involve prime
numbers. Recall that an integer larger than 1 is said to be prime if it cannot be
written as a product of two smaller positive integers. If it can be written as a
product of two smaller positive integers, then it is composite. For example, 6
is a composite number, since 6 = 2 · 3, but 7 is a prime number.
Before we can give an example of a proof involving prime numbers, we
need to find something to prove – some fact about prime numbers whose
correctness can be verified with a proof. Sometimes you can find interesting
Velleman, Daniel J.. How to Prove It : A Structured Approach, Cambridge University Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central,
http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/city/detail.action?docID=31853854.
Created from city on 2025-08-06 16:42:27.
2 Introduction
n Is n prime? 2n − 1 Is 2n − 1 prime?
2 yes 3 yes
3 yes 7 yes
4 no: 4 = 2 · 2 15 no: 15 = 3 · 5
5 yes 31 yes
6 no: 6 = 2 · 3 63 no: 63 = 7 · 9
7 yes 127 yes
8 no: 8 = 2 · 4 255 no: 255 = 15 · 17
9 no: 9 = 3 · 3 511 no: 511 = 7 · 73
10 no: 10 = 2 · 5 1023 no: 1023 = 31 · 33
Figure I.1.
Velleman, Daniel J.. How to Prove It : A Structured Approach, Cambridge University Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central,
http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/city/detail.action?docID=31853854.
Created from city on 2025-08-06 16:42:27.
Introduction 3
increase our confidence in the conjecture. But we can never be sure that
the conjecture is correct if we only check examples. No matter how many
examples we check, there is always the possibility that the next one will be the
first counterexample. The only way we can be sure that Conjecture 2 is correct
is to prove it.
In fact, Conjecture 2 is correct. Here is a proof of the conjecture:
Proof of Conjecture 2. Since n is not prime, there are positive integers a and
b such that a < n, b < n, and n = ab. Let x = 2b − 1 and y = 1 + 2b + 22b
+ · · · + 2(a−1)b . Then
Velleman, Daniel J.. How to Prove It : A Structured Approach, Cambridge University Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central,
http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/city/detail.action?docID=31853854.
Created from city on 2025-08-06 16:42:27.
4 Introduction
Although we already know that Conjecture 1 is incorrect, there are still
interesting questions we can ask about it. If we continue checking prime
numbers n to see if 2n − 1 is prime, will we continue to find counterexamples
to the conjecture – examples for which 2n − 1 is not prime? Will we continue
to find examples for which 2n − 1 is prime? If there were only finitely many
prime numbers, then we might be able to investigate these questions by simply
checking 2n −1 for every prime number n. But in fact there are infinitely many
prime numbers. Euclid (circa 300 BCE) gave a proof of this fact in Book IX
of his Elements. His proof is one of the most famous in all of mathematics:1
Theorem 3. There are infinitely many prime numbers.
Proof. Suppose there are only finitely many prime numbers. Let p1 , p2 , . . . ,
pn be a list of all prime numbers. Let m = p1 p2 · · · pn + 1. Note that m is not
divisible by p1 , since dividing m by p1 gives a quotient of p2 p3 · · · pn and a
remainder of 1. Similarly, m is not divisible by any of p2 , p3 , . . . , pn .
We now use the fact that every integer larger than 1 is either prime or can
be written as a product of two or more primes. (We’ll see a proof of this fact
in Chapter 6 – see Theorem 6.4.2.) Clearly m is larger than 1, so m is either
prime or a product of primes. Suppose first that m is prime. Note that m is
larger than all of the numbers in the list p1 , p2 , . . . , pn , so we’ve found a
prime number not in this list. But this contradicts our assumption that this was
a list of all prime numbers.
Now suppose m is a product of primes. Let q be one of the primes in this
product. Then m is divisible by q. But we’ve already seen that m is not divis-
ible by any of the numbers in the list p1 , p2 , . . . , pn , so once again we have a
contradiction with the assumption that this list included all prime numbers.
Since the assumption that there are finitely many prime numbers has led to
a contradiction, there must be infinitely many prime numbers.
Once again, you should not be concerned if some aspects of this proof
Copyright © 2019. Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved.
1 Euclid phrased the theorem and proof somewhat differently. We have chosen to take a more
modern approach in our presentation.
Velleman, Daniel J.. How to Prove It : A Structured Approach, Cambridge University Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central,
http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/city/detail.action?docID=31853854.
Created from city on 2025-08-06 16:42:27.
Introduction 5
Prime numbers of the form − 1 are called Mersenne primes, after Father
2n
Marin Mersenne (1588–1648), a French monk and scholar who studied these
numbers. Although many Mersenne primes have been found, it is still not
known if there are infinitely many of them. Many of the largest known prime
numbers are Mersenne primes. As of this writing (February 2019), the largest
known prime number is the Mersenne prime 282,589,933 − 1, a number with
24,862,048 digits.
Mersenne primes are related to perfect numbers, the subject of another
famous unsolved problem of mathematics. A positive integer n is said to be
perfect if n is equal to the sum of all positive integers smaller than n that divide
n. (For any two integers m and n, we say that m divides n if n is divisible by
m; in other words, if there is an integer q such that n = qm.) For example,
the only positive integers smaller than 6 that divide 6 are 1, 2, and 3, and
1+2+3 = 6. Thus, 6 is a perfect number. The next smallest perfect number is
28. (You should check for yourself that 28 is perfect by finding all the positive
integers smaller than 28 that divide 28 and adding them up.)
Euclid proved that if 2n − 1 is prime, then 2n−1 (2n − 1) is perfect. Thus,
every Mersenne prime gives rise to a perfect number. Furthermore, about 2000
years after Euclid’s proof, the Swiss mathematician Leonhard Euler (1707–
1783), the most prolific mathematician in history, proved that every even
perfect number arises in this way. (For example, note that 6 = 21 (22 − 1)
and 28 = 22 (23 − 1).) Because it is not known if there are infinitely many
Mersenne primes, it is also not known if there are infinitely many even perfect
numbers. It is also not known if there are any odd perfect numbers. For proofs
of the theorems of Euclid and Euler, see exercises 18 and 19 in Section 7.4.
Although there are infinitely many prime numbers, the primes thin out as we
look at larger and larger numbers. For example, there are 25 primes between
1 and 100, 16 primes between 1001 and 1100, and only six primes between
1,000,001 and 1,000,100. As our last introductory example of a proof, we
Copyright © 2019. Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved.
show that there are long stretches of consecutive positive integers containing
no primes at all. In this proof, we’ll use the following terminology: for any
positive integer n, the product of all integers from 1 to n is called n factorial
and is denoted n!. Thus, n! = 1 · 2 · 3 · · · n. As with our previous two proofs,
we’ll return to this proof at the end of Chapter 3 to analyze its structure.
Theorem 4. For every positive integer n, there is a sequence of n consecutive
positive integers containing no primes.
Proof. Suppose n is a positive integer. Let x = (n + 1)! +2. We will show that
none of the numbers x, x + 1, x + 2, . . . , x + (n − 1) is prime. Since this is a
sequence of n consecutive positive integers, this will prove the theorem.
Velleman, Daniel J.. How to Prove It : A Structured Approach, Cambridge University Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central,
http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/city/detail.action?docID=31853854.
Created from city on 2025-08-06 16:42:27.
6 Introduction
To see that x is not prime, note that
x = 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · · · (n + 1) + 2
= 2 · (1 · 3 · 4 · · · (n + 1) + 1).
x + 1 = 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · · · (n + 1) + 3
= 3 · (1 · 2 · 4 · · · (n + 1) + 1),
x + i = 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · · · (n + 1) + (i + 2)
= (i + 2) · (1 · 2 · 3 · · · (i + 1) · (i + 3) · · · (n + 1) + 1),
so x + i is not prime.
Theorem 4 shows that there are sometimes long stretches between one
prime and the next prime. But primes also sometimes occur close together.
Since 2 is the only even prime number, the only pair of consecutive integers
that are both prime is 2 and 3. But there are lots of pairs of primes that differ
by only two, for example, 5 and 7, 29 and 31, and 7949 and 7951. Such pairs
of primes are called twin primes. It is not known whether there are infinitely
many twin primes.
Recently, significant progress has been made on the twin primes question.
In 2013, Yitang Zhang (1955–) proved that there is a positive integer d ≤
70,000,000 such that there are infinitely many pairs of prime numbers that
differ by d. Work of many other mathematicians in 2013–14 narrowed down
Copyright © 2019. Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved.
Exercises
Note: Solutions or hints for exercises marked with an asterisk (*) are given in
the appendix.
*1. (a) Factor 215 − 1 = 32,767 into a product of two smaller positive
integers.
Velleman, Daniel J.. How to Prove It : A Structured Approach, Cambridge University Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central,
http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/city/detail.action?docID=31853854.
Created from city on 2025-08-06 16:42:27.
Introduction 7
(b) Find an integer x such that 1 < x < − 1 and232,767 − 1 is 232,767
divisible by x.
2. Make some conjectures about the values of n for which 3n − 1 is prime or
the values of n for which 3n − 2n is prime. (You might start by making a
table similar to Figure I.1.)
*3. The proof of Theorem 3 gives a method for finding a prime number
different from any in a given list of prime numbers.
(a) Use this method to find a prime different from 2, 3, 5, and 7.
(b) Use this method to find a prime different from 2, 5, and 11.
4. Find five consecutive integers that are not prime.
5. Use the table in Figure I.1 and the discussion on p. 5 to find two more
perfect numbers.
6. The sequence 3, 5, 7 is a list of three prime numbers such that each pair
of adjacent numbers in the list differ by two. Are there any more such
“triplet primes”?
7. A pair of distinct positive integers (m, n) is called amicable if the sum of
all positive integers smaller than n that divide n is m, and the sum of all
positive integers smaller than m that divide m is n. Show that (220, 284)
is amicable.
Copyright © 2019. Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved.
Velleman, Daniel J.. How to Prove It : A Structured Approach, Cambridge University Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central,
http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/city/detail.action?docID=31853854.
Created from city on 2025-08-06 16:42:27.