- #1
Arden1528
I am little confused on this issue, actually the thing that is confusing me is my book.
We all know the formula m=qn+r and 0<r<n
In the formula we go until r=0, then you will know relativley prime.
When given a problem, for example, (862,347) we have m=862 while n=347
so we have the equation 862=347(q)+r. Then we solve till r=0
For some reason in my book it gives the example (1251,1976)
the way they set it up is 1976=1251(1)+725 according to this
m=1976 and n=1251, isn't that backwards? I thought it went (m,n), with that in mind shouldn't it be 1251=1976(1)+r?
Or do you place the numbers accordingly so 0<r?
We all know the formula m=qn+r and 0<r<n
In the formula we go until r=0, then you will know relativley prime.
When given a problem, for example, (862,347) we have m=862 while n=347
so we have the equation 862=347(q)+r. Then we solve till r=0
For some reason in my book it gives the example (1251,1976)
the way they set it up is 1976=1251(1)+725 according to this
m=1976 and n=1251, isn't that backwards? I thought it went (m,n), with that in mind shouldn't it be 1251=1976(1)+r?
Or do you place the numbers accordingly so 0<r?