Example 8 (29th Russian Mathematical Olympiad) The sequence of positive integers is constructed as follows: is some positive integer, if is divisible by 5, then ; if is not divisible by 5, then (where denotes the greatest integer not exceeding ). Prove: The sequence is increasing from some term onwards.
Problem 1761
Official solution
Prove that for any positive integer , we have .
This is because when , .
Therefore, .
From this, we can see that the conclusion to be proven is equivalent to: there exists some positive integer , such that for all is not a multiple of 5 (at this time ). Below, we will prove this.
To do this, we first prove that the sequence contains two consecutive terms that are not multiples of 5.
We use proof by contradiction to prove this. Assume that in the sequence , any two consecutive terms have at least one that is a multiple of 5.
Consider .
(1) If , then , and by the recurrence relation of , we know , so , i.e., .
(2) If , then by the assumption in (1), , so , thus , i.e., .
Combining (1) and (2), we see that in either case, , i.e., starting from , we can find a term in the sequence such that . Similarly, starting from , we can find a term in the sequence such that , and this process can be repeated indefinitely, each new term being at least 1 less than the previous one. Since all terms in the sequence are positive integers, this process cannot continue indefinitely, leading to a contradiction.
Therefore, the assumption in (1) is false.
Thus, we have proven that the sequence must contain two consecutive terms that are not multiples of 5.
Hence, we can find two consecutive terms and that are not multiples of 5.
We now prove a lemma:
Lemma: If and are not multiples of 5, then is also not a multiple of 5.
Proof of the lemma: Since is not a multiple of 5, then by the problem statement,
.
Let , where .
Then .
Since ,
we have , so or -2 or -1.
Thus, or -2 or .
Therefore, is not a multiple of 5, and the lemma is proven.
Using the lemma and the fact that and are not multiples of 5, we can conclude that for , is not a multiple of 5. Combining this with the initial derivation, we have proven the original proposition.