a. We show that the pair (1,−512) is 51-good but not very good. Let P(x)=x3−512x. Since P(51)=P(0), the pair (1,−512) is not n-good for any positive integer that does not divide 51. Therefore, (1,−512) is not very good.
On the other hand, if P(m)≡P(k)(mod51), then m3≡k3(mod51). By Fermat's theorem, from this we obtain
m≡m3≡k3≡k(mod3)andm≡m33≡k33≡k(mod17).
Hence we have m≡k(mod51). Therefore (1,−512) is 51-good.
b. We will show that if a pair (a,b) is 2010-good then (a,b) is 67i-good for all positive integer i.
Claim 1. If (a,b) is 2010-good then (a,b) is 67-good.
Proof. Assume that P(m)≡P(k)(mod67). Since 67 and 30 are coprime, there exist integers m′ and k′ such that k′≡k(mod67), k′≡0(mod30), and m′≡m(mod67), m′≡0(mod30). Then we have P(m′)≡P(0)≡P(k′)(mod30) and P(m′)≡P(m)≡P(k)≡P(k′)(mod67), hence P(m′)≡P(k′)(mod2010). This implies m′≡k′(mod2010) as (a,b) is 2010-good. It follows that m≡m′≡k′≡k(mod67). Therefore, (a,b) is 67-good.
Claim 2. If (a,b) is 67-good then 67∣a.
Proof. Suppose that 67∤a. Consider the sets {at2(mod67):0≤t≤33} and {−3as2−b(mod67):0≤s≤33}. Since a≡0(mod67), each of these sets has 34 elements. Hence they have at least one element in common. If at2≡−3as2−b(mod67) then for m=t±s, k=∓2s we have
P(m)−P(k)=a(m3−k3)+b(m−k)=(m−k)(a(m2+mk+k2)+b)=(t±3s)(at2+3as2+b)≡0(mod67)
Since (a,b) is 67-good, we must have m≡k(mod67) in both cases, that is, t≡3s(mod67) and t≡−3s(mod67). This means t≡s≡0(mod67) and b≡−3as2−at2≡0(mod67). But then 67∣P(7)−P(2)=67⋅5a+5b and 67∤7−2, contradicting that (a,b) is 67-good.
Claim 3. If (a,b) is 2010-good then (a,b) is 67i-good for all i≥1.
Proof. By Claim 2, we have 67∣a. If 67∣b, then P(x)≡P(0)(mod67) for all x, contradicting that (a,b) is 67-good. Hence, 67∤b.
Suppose that 67i∣P(m)−P(k)=(m−k)(a(m2+mk+k2)+b). Since 67∣a and 67∤b, the second factor a(m2+mk+k2)+b is coprime to 67 and hence 67i∣m−k. Therefore, (a,b) is 67i-good.