Number Theory WOP: Find Smallest Integer of Form a - bk

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem in number theory concerning the existence of the smallest positive integer of the form a - bk, where a and b are positive integers and k is an integer. Participants are exploring the implications of the well-ordering principle in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to understand the implications of the well-ordering principle and whether it refers to k or the expression a - bk as the smallest element. There is confusion about how the smallest element is determined within the set S.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided clarifications regarding the well-ordering principle, noting that it guarantees the existence of a smallest element without specifying what that element is. There seems to be an ongoing exploration of the definitions and implications of the terms used in the problem.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about their understanding of the well-ordering principle and its application to the problem, indicating a potential gap in their knowledge of proofs and number theory concepts.

dashhh
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
I've just begun number theory and am having a lot of trouble with proofs. I think I am slowly grasping it, but would appreciate some clarification or any tips on the following please.

Show that if a and b are positive integers, then there is a smallest positive integer of the form a - bk, k \in Z

The answer given is:
Let a and b be positive integers and let

S = {n:n is a positive integer and n = a - bk for some k \in Z}

Now S is nonempty since a + b = a - b(-1) is in S. By the well ordering principle, S has a least element.

So, are they implying that k is the smallest element? or a - b(-1) as a whole is the smallest element?

I'm unsure as to how they are showing that it is the smallest element though. Given that either of the two options above would be S_{o}, what value would be the comparing s?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
welcome to pf!

hi dashhh! welcome to pf! :wink:
dashhh said:
… By the well ordering principle, S has a least element.

So, are they implying that k is the smallest element? or a - b(-1) as a whole is the smallest element?

no, they're not saying anything about the smallest element

they're only saying that a smallest element exists

that's all the well ordering principle proves :smile:
 
dashhh said:
I've just begun number theory and am having a lot of trouble with proofs. I think I am slowly grasping it, but would appreciate some clarification or any tips on the following please.

Show that if a and b are positive integers, then there is a smallest positive integer of the form a - bk, k \in Z

The answer given is:
Let a and b be positive integers and let

S = {n:n is a positive integer and n = a - bk for some k \in Z}

Now S is nonempty since a + b = a - b(-1) is in S. By the well ordering principle, S has a least element.

So, are they implying that k is the smallest element? or a - b(-1) as a whole is the smallest element?
Neither. They are saying that a- bk, for that particular k, is the smallest element.

I'm unsure as to how they are showing that it is the smallest element though. Given that either of the two options above would be S_{o}, what value would be the comparing s?
 
It would seem you are contradicting one another?
Or am i confused all over again?

EDIT: My only understanding of WOP is that you need S_{o}<S
This is all we have learned so far, so based on the fact we should be able to understand (at least vaguely) what is going on with what we are supposed to know, I don't see how this should make sense yet. Is it due to being lacking in the area of proofs?

I should also mention I have actually looked at other resources etc, not just lecture notes.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
39
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K