- #1

- 31

- 0

## Homework Statement

if (a,c)=1 and (b,c)=1 prove that (ab,c)=1

## Homework Equations

I know that (a,c)=1 says that au+cv=1 and bs+ct=1 prove abq+cr=1

## The Attempt at a Solution

I set au+cv=bs+ct now I don't know what to do

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

- Thread starter j9mom
- Start date

- #1

- 31

- 0

if (a,c)=1 and (b,c)=1 prove that (ab,c)=1

I know that (a,c)=1 says that au+cv=1 and bs+ct=1 prove abq+cr=1

I set au+cv=bs+ct now I don't know what to do

- #2

- 243

- 0

do you know the theorem that if d|ab, then d|a or d|b?

- #3

- 31

- 0

Yes I did learn that, but how do I use that?

- #4

- 31

- 0

- #5

Dick

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 26,260

- 619

do you know the theorem that if d|ab, then d|a or d|b?

That's false. 6|(3*4) but 6 doesn't divide 3 or 4. You had better say the word 'prime' at some point.

- #6

- 31

- 0

- #7

- 31

- 0

Wait... x is a prime number greater than 1 that divides c

- #8

- 243

- 0

That's false. 6|(3*4) but 6 doesn't divide 3 or 4. You had better say the word 'prime' at some point.

You're right. Thanks for the correction

- #9

- 31

- 0

Thanks

- #10

Dick

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 26,260

- 619

Wait... x is a prime number greater than 1 that divides c

Slow down. Can you state your reasoning in complete sentences? (a,c)=1 means a and c have no common prime divisors. Now continue.

- #11

- 243

- 0

Wait... x is a prime number greater than 1 that divides c

you don't need to specify 'greater than 1' because 1 isn't prime.

so if d|(ab, c), then there exists some prime p such that p|ab.

- #12

- 31

- 0

- #13

- 243

- 0

- #14

- 31

- 0

- #15

- 31

- 0

A philospher: my x equals a prime number that divides c.

- #16

Dick

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 26,260

- 619

Why are you rushing this? Think about it. You can't assume BOTH x|c AND (ab,c)=x without justifying it. Look, start from this: If (ab,c) is not 1, then let x be a prime that divides (ab,c). Go from there. SLOWLY.

- #17

- 31

- 0

- #18

- 31

- 0

Ok let me start again.

- #19

- 243

- 0

You can't assume BOTH x|c AND (ab,c)=x without justifying it.

Yes you can. By definition. What can't be assumed is that (ab, c)=x and that x is prime.

- #20

- 31

- 0

- #21

- 243

- 0

that's the idea. looks good.

- #22

- 243

- 0

- #23

Dick

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 26,260

- 619

Yes you can. By definition. What can't be assumed is that (ab, c)=x and that x is prime.

On that, you are right. Oh, I see you've both already finished. Sorry to be so slow.

- #24

- 31

- 0

- #25

- 392

- 0

You originally used the theorem that (m,n)=d implies mx+ny=d for some integers x, y. Even though the converse is not true in general, it is true that for the special case d=1, this is an "if and only if."

That is, (m,n)=1 if and only if mx+ny=1 for some integers x, y. If you have this theorem, then you can give a nice solution to your problem.

So, if (a,c)=1 and (b,c)=1 prove that (ab,c)=1.

You know au+cv=1 and bs+ct=1 for some integers u, v, s, and t.

Now multiply those two equations and put into the form ab(some integer) + c(big mess)=1, where big mess is an integer.

Share: