MHB How Do You Prove That sa + tb Divides gcd(a, b) in Bezout's Lemma?

  • Thread starter Thread starter nicodemus1
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
To prove Bezout's Lemma, it's established that gcd(a, b) divides both a and b, leading to the conclusion that gcd(a, b) also divides sa + tb. The discussion emphasizes that since sa + tb is a common divisor of a and b, it cannot exceed the greatest common divisor, d. The definition of gcd(a, b) asserts that any common divisor must divide the gcd itself. Therefore, since sa + tb divides both a and b, it follows that sa + tb must also divide gcd(a, b). The key takeaway is that any common divisor of a and b, including sa + tb, is inherently a divisor of their gcd.
nicodemus1
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Good Day,

I have to prove Bezout's Lemma.

I have proven that since gcd (a, b) divides a and gcd (a, b) divides b, gcd (a, b) divides sa + tb.

I've made use of the well-ordering principle and Euclid's Algorithm to show that sa + tb divides a and sa + tb divides b.

What I can't prove is that sa + tb divides gcd (a, b).

Please help me here.

Thank you.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
nicodemus said:
Good Day,

I have to prove Bezout's Lemma.

I have proven that since gcd (a, b) divides a and gcd (a, b) divides b, gcd (a, b) divides sa + tb.

I've made use of the well-ordering principle and Euclid's Algorithm to show that sa + tb divides a and sa + tb divides b.

What I can't prove is that sa + tb divides gcd (a, b).

Please help me here.

Thank you.

since d = gcd(a,b) is the largest positive integer that divides both a and b,

and d divides sa + tb, d ≤ sa + tb, whence sa + tb = d, since sa + tb divides both a and b.
 
Good Day,

Thank you for your reply.

However, I still don't get why sa + tb divides gcd(a, b).

Thanks & Regards,
Nicodemus
 
the "g" in gcd stands for "greatest". the "cd" stands for "common divisor".

since sa + tb is a common divisor of a and b, it cannot be "greater than" the greatest common divisor of a and b, can it?

EVERY number divides it self.

specifically, the DEFINTION of gcd(a,b) is:

d: d|a and d|b and (for all c: if c|a and c|b then c|d).

we have shown that c = sa + tb divides both a and b. therefore c|d.

do you have a different definition of gcd(a,b)?
 
Here is a little puzzle from the book 100 Geometric Games by Pierre Berloquin. The side of a small square is one meter long and the side of a larger square one and a half meters long. One vertex of the large square is at the center of the small square. The side of the large square cuts two sides of the small square into one- third parts and two-thirds parts. What is the area where the squares overlap?

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K