CP 1.1 - Induction for divisibility
Divisibility proofs let you say something exact about numbers far too large to write down. You will use the induction structure you already know, express the assumed case as an integer multiple and rearrange the next case until that multiple appears.
What a divisibility assumption means
Is the integer consisting of nines divisible by ? You could start dividing, but the smaller cases suggest a much shorter route:
In fact, an integer made entirely of nines is divisible by whenever its number of digits is a positive multiple of . We will prove that fact at the end. Its enormous size is a distraction: what matters is how another block of three nines is attached.
You already know
Induction checks a starting case, assumes a statement at one arbitrary integer and proves the case . From A-level Mathematics, factorisation rewrites an expression without changing it; for example, .
For divisibility, the phrase “is a multiple of” needs an integer quotient. For instance, proves that is divisible by , whereas says nothing useful about divisibility.
Divisibility
For integers and , with , is divisible by if for some integer . For example, and are divisible by . The number is not divisible by .
If the claim is that is divisible by , assume for an integer . Keep for the index and for the quotient: they have different jobs. The next quotient can be a different integer.
Integer combinations preserve divisibility
If and , where are integers and , then for integers :
Thus every integer combination of multiples of is another multiple of .
Not in the formula booklet: learn it.
For an inductive step, this gives a useful target: express as an integer times , together with another visible multiple of . The assumed divisibility then transfers to the next case.
Key idea
The index says which case you are considering; the integer quotient says why that case is divisible. Assuming lets the quotient change as the proof advances.
This distinction is the first thing to check in a divisibility proof.
Rewriting a power using the assumed case
A power has a simple connection to its next indexed case: use the laws of indices to separate the new factor, then rebuild the entire assumed expression inside a bracket.
For , increasing by adds to the exponent, so
The multiplier is , not . That small bookkeeping decision determines the rest of the proof.
Advancing an indexed power
For a non-zero real number , integer constants and integer :
Not in the formula booklet: learn it.
The constant outside the power must also be accounted for. Multiplying the whole assumed expression changes that constant, so add or subtract a correction to preserve equality.
Worked example 1: a power minus one
Question. Prove by induction that is divisible by for all positive integers .
Plan. Check , assume and rewrite the next case using nine times the whole assumed expression.
At ,
so the result is true for .
Assume for an integer , where is an arbitrary positive integer. Then
Why this step? Nine times has a constant term of . Adding restores the required constant .
Answer. Since is an integer, truth for implies truth for . The result is true for , so it holds for all positive integers , by induction.
Check. At , . The next quotient after is .
Worked example 2 changes just the added constant, from to . The power still advances by a factor of , but the correction term changes sign.
Worked example 2: correcting the constant
Question. Prove by induction that is divisible by for all positive integers .
Plan. Check the first case, assume and compare the next expression with nine times that assumption.
At ,
so the result is true for .
Assume for some integer , where is an arbitrary integer. Then
Why this step? The bracket contributes , but the required constant is . Subtracting , itself a multiple of , fixes the difference.
Answer. The quantity is an integer, so truth for implies truth for . Since the result is true for , it is true for all positive integers , by induction.
Check. At , , and the quotient rule gives .
Neither divisibility statement is in the formula booklet: prove it when asked. The point to learn is the rearrangement, which makes the assumed multiple visible.
Watch out
Wrong: . The right side has constant term , not . Right: . Expand your bracket once to check the correction.
Showing that a bracket is integer-valued completes the divisibility step. You must then connect that step to the checked starting case in your conclusion.
Exam tip
State “If true for , then true for ”. Follow it with the base case and the stated domain. The two cases are linked by your argument; listing them as separate true statements loses that logic.
The following question changes the constant once more. Keep the whole assumed expression together when multiplying by .
Combining powers with different multipliers
When two powers advance by different factors, choose one multiplier for the entire assumed expression and collect the mismatch as a separate term.
For the next multiplier is ; for it is . Their difference is , which is promising if the required divisor is . Either multiplier can work; choose the one that leaves the cleaner correction.
Worked example 3: a difference of powers
Question. Prove by induction that is divisible by for all positive integers .
Plan. Check the first case, assume the difference is and compare the next case with times the assumed difference.
At ,
so the result is true for .
Assume for an integer , where is an arbitrary positive integer. Then
Why this step? Multiplying the whole difference by matches the second power exactly. The unmatched part of the first power is a multiple of .
Answer. Since is an integer, truth for implies truth for . The result is true for , so it holds for every positive integer , by induction.
Check. At , , and .
Worked example 4 changes the coefficient of the second power from to . Multiplying by still matches that entire second term; the same simple correction survives.
Worked example 4: a sum of two powers
Question. Prove by induction that is divisible by for all positive integers .
Plan. Verify the new base case, then multiply the whole assumed expression by and collect the remaining multiple of .
At ,
so the result is true for .
Assume for an integer , where is an arbitrary positive integer. Then
Why this step? Keeping the coefficient inside the bracket lets account for the entire second term. Only the mismatch in the first power needs correcting.
Answer. Truth for implies truth for , because is an integer. The result is true for , so it is true for all positive integers , by induction.
Check. At , . The quotient rule gives .
These two-power divisibility results are not in the formula booklet: derive them when asked. You need no new theorem, only the correct multipliers and an exact rearrangement.
Watch out
Wrong: . The two powers advance by different factors. Right: use one multiplier for the whole expression and include the mismatch explicitly, as in Worked example 4.
Return to the nines puzzle. Let , the integer with nines. Its first case is . Assuming for integer ,
The bracket is an integer. Thus truth for implies truth for ; with the checked case , induction proves divisibility for every positive integer . Since , the opening integer is , so it is divisible by . This result is not in the formula booklet; the proof explains it.
The next question changes the coefficient again. Make the assumed expression appear intact before using its divisibility.
Quick Recap
- Assume an integer multiple ; the quotient need not equal the index .
- Use the laws of indices to find the multiplier for each power.
- Rearrange the next case to expose the entire assumed expression and a visible multiple of the divisor.
- State why the new quotient is an integer, then connect the implication and base case to the whole domain.
The integer with nines is divisible by : every block of three more nines preserves that divisibility.