Proving the Primality of an Integer with a Specific Divisibility Property

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cableguy008
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integer Prime
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around proving that an integer p, which has a specific divisibility property, must be prime. The property states that if p divides the product of two integers b and c, then p must divide at least one of them. Participants explore various approaches, including using the hint about divisors and manipulating equations involving gcd. They conclude that if p is not prime, it can be expressed as a product of two integers, leading to contradictions regarding the divisibility of its divisors. Ultimately, they affirm that p must be either ±p or ±1, confirming that p is indeed prime.
Cableguy008
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hey there, I've been having some problems trying to prove this:

"Let p be an integer other than 0, +/- 1 with this property: Whenever b and c are integers such that p | bc, then p | b or p | c. Prove p is prime. [Hint: If d is a divisor of p, say p = dt, then p | d or p | t. Show that this implies d = +/- p or d = +/- 1.]"

Proving p *can* be prime isn't too difficult, but proving p *must* be prime has really confused me.

I've tried going down the path, gcd(p,b) = p if p | b. Which means p = pn + bm, but since b = px, p = pn + pxm = p(n + mx) => n + mx = 1. This doesn't seem to get me anywhere though.

Then I've tried using b = pn, c = pm and tried various manipulations such as b / n = c / m => bm = cn = pmn but I just don't see how I can get it in the form p = dt.

Now, if I got it to the form p = dt, I'm not sure how I could prove p must be prime. Who's to say its not prime? I don't know it seems like I'm thinking in circles here. (Sorry for not properly defining n,m and x I just assumed they were integers to save time). Any help would be greatly appreciated. Unfortunately my professor has been out of town for the entire week so I've been unable to seek help from him (its still due though of course :P).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Suppose p is NOT a prime. Then p= mn for some integers m and n. Let b= m, c= n.

bc= mn is divisible by p but neither b nor c are.
 
Use their hint. If p=dt then you know p|d or p|t, assume it's the former. So p|d and d|p, which is larger in absolute value, d or p?
 
"Use their hint. If p=dt then you know p|d or p|t, assume it's the former. So p|d and d|p, which is larger in absolute value, d or p?"

Ok so since p = dt (or nm) p / d = t, since t is an int d | p. If p | d, d / p = 1 / t, so t = +/- 1 and thus d = +/- p. Conversely if p | t, WLOG t = +/- p, d = +/- 1. So d = +/- p or +/- 1 and p is prime. Is this correct?
 
Cableguy008 said:
"Use their hint. If p=dt then you know p|d or p|t, assume it's the former. So p|d and d|p, which is larger in absolute value, d or p?"

Ok so since p = dt (or nm) p / d = t, since t is an int d | p. If p | d, d / p = 1 / t, so t = +/- 1 and thus d = +/- p. Conversely if p | t, WLOG t = +/- p, d = +/- 1. So d = +/- p or +/- 1 and p is prime. Is this correct?

Looks good, though not exactly what I had in mind. If a|b then a<=b, etc (assuming a, b positive-it's such a pain to work with the integers instead of the naturals here, note there should also be a requirement that p is positive if you mean it to be a prime in the usual sense).
 
Thanks for the input you two, you've truly helped out.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top