A proof involving Greatest common divisors

  • Thread starter Thread starter zoner7
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving a relationship involving the greatest common divisors (gcd) of two numbers, specifically addressing the equation \( a = bq + r \) and its implications for \( (a, b) \) and \( (b, r) \). The subject area is number theory, particularly focusing on the properties of gcd and the Euclidean algorithm.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of the Euclidean algorithm, questioning how common divisors relate between \( a, b \), and \( r \). Some express confusion about the steps taken and the final goal of the proof, while others attempt to clarify the relationships between the variables involved.

Discussion Status

Several participants have provided hints and guidance regarding the proof, particularly focusing on the properties of divisibility and the relationships between gcds. There is an ongoing exploration of different interpretations and approaches to the problem, with some participants expressing uncertainty about their understanding of the concepts involved.

Contextual Notes

Some participants mention feeling overwhelmed by the material, indicating a potential gap in foundational understanding. There are references to the difficulty of the problem and the need for additional resources to aid comprehension.

zoner7
Messages
89
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



If b>0 and a=bq + r, prove that (a,b) = (b,r)

I made an attempt... it didnt really go anywhere.

I think I can say that (a,b) = am + bn and (b,r) = bp + rq.
maybe...
a = bq + r
b = rp + s
You can see that I have absolutely no idea how to solve this.

Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It follows from the Euclidean Algorithm; Consider if c divides a and b, then let a=cs and b=ct with s,t being integers. Then

[tex]r=a-bq=cs-(ct)q=c(s-tq) \Rightarrow c | r[/tex]

And therefore c also divides b and r. Can you think of how the rest should go?
 
jeffreydk said:
It follows from the Euclidean Algorithm; Consider if c divides a and b, then let a=cs and b=ct with s,t being integers. Then

[tex]r=a-bq=cs-(ct)q=c(s-tq) \Rightarrow c | r[/tex]

And therefore c also divides b and r. Can you think of how the rest should go?

well... I didn't accomplish too much. What exactly is my final goal supposed to be? What should I be showing next?

I tried to say
r = bq + w
w = r-bp
w = r - ctp
w c(s - tq) - ctq
w = c(s - t(q - p))

and then i decided that I wasn't really doing anything correctly and examined the equation
r - r = bq
q - c(s - tq) = bq
a = cs - ctq = bq
cs - cs - ctq = bq
bq = bq...
Clearly this is wrong...

So what am I trying to accomplish in the end?
 
Now you have c|a and c|b. you get c|r from jeffreydk's hint.
Then you have c|b and c|r, which implies c|gcd(b,r), which means c is a common divisor of b and r.
if c=gcd(a,b), you are supposed to show c is actually the GREATEST common divisor of b and r

here's another way, gcd(a,b)|gcd(b,r) and gcd(b,r)|gcd(a,b) will imply they are equal. I think you have already got gcd(a,b)|gcd(b,r), you can prove gcd(b,r)|gcd(a,b) in a similar way.
 
boombaby said:
Now you have c|a and c|b. you get c|r from jeffreydk's hint.
Then you have c|b and c|r, which implies c|gcd(b,r), which means c is a common divisor of b and r.
if c=gcd(a,b), you are supposed to show c is actually the GREATEST common divisor of b and r

here's another way, gcd(a,b)|gcd(b,r) and gcd(b,r)|gcd(a,b) will imply they are equal. I think you have already got gcd(a,b)|gcd(b,r), you can prove gcd(b,r)|gcd(a,b) in a similar way.

alright. that makes sense based on the proof of a GCD. Thank you. I probably got it from here.
 
well... I think I am dropping this class. its simply not making sense, and this is supposed to be one of the easier problems

I said
let r = cp
b = rq + w
w = b - rq
w = ct - cpq
w = c(t - pq)
implies c divides w

but I don't think this implies c divided (a,b)...

anyone know some good resources where I can get some help?
 
foget about b=rq+w, focus on a=bx+r. Now a=c*something+c*something...can you get it now?

Also you would notice that,
1,a=bq+r. if c|a and c|b, you proved that c|r
now look at this one
2,b=rp+w. you have c|b and c|r, you proved that c|w
See? you are doing exactly the same thing two times.
 
Well, I just tried it, wrote everything out and then realized that I made the same error that i did last time.

I guess I'm not really sure how to set the problems up in the first place. Clearly I don't understand something quite integral to the topic at hand.

What exactly am I saying when i write a = bx + r and a = bq+ r? Why is r the same for both of them? Why isn't a separate value required?

im calling it quits on this one... i can't figure it out.
I just don't understand the concepts at hand. Until I learn them, attempting this is futile.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K