Prove That GCD(a,b) = 1 Implies LCM(a,b) = ab

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Yoss
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof Suggestion
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the relationship between the greatest common divisor (GCD) and the least common multiple (LCM) of two natural numbers, specifically that if GCD(a,b) = 1, then LCM(a,b) = ab. The scope includes mathematical reasoning and exploration of properties related to number theory.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes starting with the definition of LCM and using properties of divisibility to show that if GCD(a,b) = 1, then LCM(a,b) must equal ab.
  • Another participant suggests a proof involving the fundamental theorem of algebra, although this is later clarified to refer to the fundamental theorem of arithmetic.
  • Several participants express uncertainty about whether they are on the right track and seek suggestions for applying the fundamental theorem of arithmetic to the problem.
  • One participant notes that LCM(a,b) is less than or equal to ab, which is a common multiple, and suggests using this fact in the proof.
  • A more general result involving GCD and LCM is mentioned, indicating a relationship between the two concepts through their prime factorization.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of confidence in their approaches, with some indicating they are unsure or feel they are missing key properties. There is no consensus on a definitive proof or method to solve the problem, and multiple viewpoints on the application of theorems exist.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention potential missing trivial properties and express uncertainty about their reasoning, indicating that assumptions or definitions may not be fully explored.

Yoss
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
Let a and b be natural numbers and LCM(a,b) = m.
Prove that if GCD(a,b) = 1, then LCM(a,b) = ab.

What I got so far was that since b|LCM(a,b), then b*k = LCM(a,b) for some natural number k. I know I need to show that k </= a and k >/= a so I get a = k. And show that b*k = ba = LCM(a,b).

I can get a </= k:

Since LCM(a,b) = m, then a|m and b|m. Since LCM(a,b) = m = b*k, then a|bk. <And by the Euclid's Lemma, if a|bc and GCD(a,b) = 1, then a|c>. So
a|k. So a*j = k for some natural number j, and therefore a </= k.

I'm sure I have to derive that a >/= k by the antecedent. I'm trying to use the property that GCD(a,b) = 1 = a*x + b*y for some integers x and y by showing that k|a. But I'm stuck.

Any suggestions? Thanks

Edit: Maybe I should have posted this in Number Theory. Mod, can you move it if you think it should be there?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
There's a nice proof using the fundamental theorem of algebra.
 
NateTG said:
There's a nice proof using the fundamental theorem of algebra.

I'm sorry NateTG, I don't follow. Can you please elaborate?
 
I think you might mean Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic.
 
Yoss said:
I think you might mean Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic.
Yep. Sorry. Apparently I need to sleep more.
 
Am I even on the right track? It feels like I'm missing some trivial property that I need to solve this. Can anyone suggest something, and perhaps how to apply the FTA to this? Thanks.
 
Yeah, I think you're almost there.
You're trying to prove that [tex]a \geq k[/tex], right?
You might want to use the fact that [tex]LCM(a,b) \leq ab[/tex] since [tex]ab[/tex] is obviously a common multiple.
 
Also, the more general result :(a,b)*((a,b)) = ab where () is GCD, (( )) is LCM follows directly from

[tex](a,b) = \prod_i p_i^{min(k_i,l_i)} ~~[/tex] and

[tex]((a,b)) = \prod_i p_i^{max(k_i,l_i)}~~[/tex] where

[tex]a = \prod_i p_i^{k_i} ~~[/tex] and

[tex]b = \prod_i p_i^{l_i}[/tex]
 
Last edited:
NateTG said:
Yeah, I think you're almost there.
You're trying to prove that [tex]a \geq k[/tex], right?
You might want to use the fact that [tex]LCM(a,b) \leq ab[/tex] since [tex]ab[/tex] is obviously a common multiple.

I knew it was something trivial I didn't see. Thanks NateG and Goku.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
8K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K