Proof About Greatest Common Divisors

  • Thread starter Thread starter daneault23
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around disproving an assertion related to the existence of distinct positive integers a and b, such that for all natural numbers n, either (a,n)=1 or (b,n)=1. The subject area involves number theory, specifically focusing on greatest common divisors.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of the assertion by considering specific values for a and b, questioning the validity of the original statement, and examining cases where n equals a or b. There are attempts to construct counterexamples and clarify the conditions under which the assertion holds.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants sharing their reasoning and questioning assumptions. Some have proposed specific examples to illustrate their points, while others express confusion about how hints from the textbook relate to the problem. There is no explicit consensus on the resolution of the assertion, but various interpretations are being explored.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the assertion may only hold true for specific cases, such as when a or b equals 1. There is also mention of a hint from the textbook suggesting a counterexample involving small integers, which some find unclear in its application.

daneault23
Messages
32
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Disprove the following assertion: "There exist distinct positive integers a and b such that for all natural numbers n we have (a,n)=1 or (b,n)=1."


Homework Equations


(a,n)=1 and (b,n)=1 means greatest common divisor of a and n is 1, and of b and n is 1, respectively.


The Attempt at a Solution



This was my attempt at a solution. My teacher said it was wrong. Not really sure why.

Suppose there exists such a and b that are natural numbers where a isn't equal to b, a and b aren't equal to 1, where for all n that are natural numbers we have (a,n)=1 or (b,n)=1. Since a isn't equal to 1, we have that there's a prime divisor of a, i.e. p1=P. Since b isn't equal to 1, we have that there's a prime divisor of b, i.e. p2=P. Take n=p1*p2. Then p1 divides (a,n) where (a,n)>1, and p2 divides (b,n) where (b,n)>1 which is a contradiction.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
daneault23 said:
Suppose there exists such a and b that are natural numbers where a isn't equal to b, a and b aren't equal to 1, where for all n that are natural numbers we have (a,n)=1 or (b,n)=1. Since a isn't equal to 1, we have that there's a prime divisor of a, i.e. p1=P.
If there is a prime divisor p1 of a, then wouldn't (a, p1) = p1?
 
Have you considered the cases n= a and n= b?
 
HallsofIvy said:
Have you considered the cases n= a and n= b?

In those cases then (a,n) and b,n)=n wouldn' they? In our book it gives a hint that says "try finding the smallest such counterexample when a=2 and b=5. How does this suggest that we construct a counterexample in general?"

If a=2 and b=5, then (a,n)=1 if and only if n was an odd number (aka not a multiple of 2). If b=5, (b,n)=1 if and only if n wasn't divisible by 5. I'm just confused. I don't see how the hint helps me.
 
Aha I somewhat got it. Not sure how to actually prove it though. The assertion only works for a=b=1 because any number larger than 1 has a natural number associated with it which share a greatest common divisor. For example, let a=10. Then n could be 10 also and then (a,n,)=10
 
daneault23 said:
Aha I somewhat got it. Not sure how to actually prove it though. The assertion only works for a=b=1 because any number larger than 1 has a natural number associated with it which share a greatest common divisor. For example, let a=10. Then n could be 10 also and then (a,n,)=10

What is (b,n) when n = 10?
 
Nevermind guys I got it. The assertion is actually true when either a or b (not both) equals 1. The book tricked me by saying disprove the assertion when is reality the assertion is really true.

let's say a=1 then (a,n)=1 and it doesn't matter what positive integer b is (as long as its not 1), then the assertion holds.
 
Hmm, perhaps the question should have been,

Disprove: There exist integers 1 <= a < b such that, for every natural number n, (a,n) = 1 or (b,n) = 1.

But, daneault23, you answered the question as posed so good job.
 
verty said:
Hmm, perhaps the question should have been,

Disprove: There exist integers 1 <= a < b such that, for every natural number n, (a,n) = 1 or (b,n) = 1.

But, daneault23, you answered the question as posed so good job.

Tricky books these days lol
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K