# Solutions of EGMO 2021 Problem 1. According to Anna, the number 2021 is fantabulous. She states that if any element of the set $\{m, 2 m+1,3 m\}$ is fantabulousfor a positive integer $m$, then they are all fantabulous. Is the number 2021 ${ }^{2021}$ fantabulous? (Australia, Angelo Di Pasquale) Answer: Yes ## Solution 1. Consider the sequence of positive integers $m, 3 m, 6 m+1,12 m+3,4 m+1,2 m$. Since each number in the sequence is fantabulous if and only if the next one is, we deduce that $m$ is fantabulous if and only if $2 m$ is fantabulous. Combined with the fact that $m$ is fantabulous if and only if $2 m+1$ is fantabulous, this implies that $m>1$ is fantabulous if and only if $f(m)=\left[\frac{m}{2}\right]$ is fantabulous. We can apply $f$ sufficiently many times to any positive integer $n$ to conclude that $n$ is fantabulous if and only if 1 is fantabulous. Therefore, the fact that 2021 is fantabulous implies that 1 is fantabulous, which in turn implies that $2021^{2021}$ is fantabulous. ## Solution 2. Let $m>1$ be a fantabulous number. Note that at least one of the following four cases must hold. - Case 1. The number $m$ is odd; We have $m=2 a+1$ for some positive integer $a$, so $a10^{7}$ and note that for $m=q^{3}$ $$ L\left(q^{3}\right)=\sum_{k=1}^{q^{3}}\left[\frac{q^{3}}{k}\right] \leq \sum_{k=1}^{q^{3}} \frac{q^{3}}{k} \leq q^{3} \cdot \sum_{k=1}^{q^{3}} \frac{1}{k} \leq q^{3} \cdot q=q^{4} $$ Indeed, the first inequality results from $[x] \leq x$. The second inequality can be seen (for instance) as follows. We divide the terms in the sum $\sum_{k=1}^{q^{3}} \frac{1}{k}$ into several groups: For $j \geq 0$, the $j$-th group contains the $2^{j}$ consecutive terms $\frac{1}{2^{j}}, \ldots, \frac{1}{2^{j+1}-1}$. Since every term in the $j$-th group is bounded by $\frac{1}{2^{j}}$, the overall contribution of the $j$-th group to the sum is at most 1 . Since the first $q$ groups together would contain $2^{q}-1>q^{3}$ terms, the number of groups does not exceed $q$, and hence the value of the sum under consideration is indeed bounded by $q$. Call an integer $m$ special, if it satisfies $1 \leq L(m) \leq q^{4}$. Denote by $g(m) \geq 1$ the largest integer whose square is bounded by $L(m)$; in other words $g^{2}(m) \leq L(m)<(g(m)+1)^{2}$. Notethat $g(m) \leq$ $q^{2}$ for all special $m$, which implies $$ 0 \leq L(m)-g^{2}(m)<(g(m)+1)^{2}-g^{2}(m)=2 g(m)+1 \leq 2 q^{2}+1 $$ Finally, we do some counting. Inequality (2) and the monotonicity of $L(m)$ imply that there exist at least $q^{3}$ special integers. Because of (3), every special integer $m$ has $0 \leq L(m)-g^{2}(m) \leq 2 q^{2}+1$. By averaging, at least $\frac{q^{3}}{2 q^{2}+2}>10^{6}$ special integers must yield the same value $L(m)-g^{2}(m)$. This frequently occurring value is our choice for $\alpha$, which yields more than $10^{6}$ solutions $(m, g(m))$ to equation (1). Hence, the answer to the problem is YES.