Hard? least common multiple problem

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Hello Kitty
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Hard Multiple
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the mathematical problem of determining whether, given natural numbers a_1, ..., a_n, the condition that the least common multiple (LCM) of every n-1 of them equals the LCM of all n numbers (denoted as m) implies that at least one of the numbers a_i equals m. The case for n=2 is confirmed as true, while attempts to generalize this for n=3 reveal that constructing examples such as (6, 10, 15) leads to the conclusion that the LCM can exceed individual elements. The discussion emphasizes the complexity of proving or disproving the statement through systems of equations and seeks further exploration of patterns for larger n.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of least common multiples (LCM) and greatest common divisors (GCD)
  • Familiarity with algebraic systems of equations
  • Basic knowledge of number theory concepts
  • Experience with mathematical proof techniques
NEXT STEPS
  • Investigate the properties of LCM and GCD in number theory
  • Explore mathematical proofs related to LCM conditions for n=3 and higher
  • Examine counterexamples for various values of n to identify patterns
  • Study systems of equations in algebra to enhance problem-solving skills
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students studying number theory, and anyone interested in exploring properties of least common multiples and their implications in algebraic contexts.

Hello Kitty
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
I'm trying to prove or disprove the following:

Let a_1, ..., a_n be natural numbers such that the least common multiple of EVERY n-1 of them is equal to lcm(a_1, ..., a_n) = m. Is it true that a_i = m for some i?

The method I've tried so far is to build systems of equations using the information known to prove it in the positive, but it gets very messy. I've also had no luck finding a counter example.

n=2 is easy (it's true), but the method doesn't generalize.

Thanks in advance.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Try it for a few more n's and do you see a pattern?
 
Consider n=3: (a,b,c), and let's try to find a counterexample. Let d=gcd(a,b), e=gcd(b,c), f=gcd(a,c). Clearly we must have d,e,f>1 or one would be the lcm of the other two. Let's assume that (d,e,f)=1 for simplicity. The simplest way to construct a triple would be (df,de,ef). Then:
lcm(df,de)=lcm(de,ef)=lcm(df,ef)=lcm(df,ef,de)=def=m > a,b,c. Or a more concrete example: (6,10,15) then the lcm = 30.
 
Many thanks. Yes, silly of me not to spot this sooner. Actually I'm trying to solve a more general problem and this would have been a sufficient condition if it were true. My post in the algebra section has the details.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K