MHB Proving Divisibility: Does a^n Divide b^n Imply a Divides b?

  • Thread starter Thread starter evinda
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on proving that if \( a^n \) divides \( b^n \), then \( a \) must divide \( b \). The initial approach involves expressing \( a \) and \( b \) in terms of their greatest common divisor \( d \) and coprime factors \( a_1 \) and \( b_1 \). The conclusion drawn is that since \( (a_1, b_1) = 1 \), it follows that \( a_1 \) divides \( b_1 \), leading to the assertion that \( a \) divides \( b \). However, there is a clarification needed regarding the implications of \( d \cdot b_1 = l \cdot d \cdot a_1 \), which does not imply \( b \) divides \( a \). Ultimately, the solution confirms that \( a \mid b \) is indeed correct.
evinda
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,741
Reaction score
0
Hey! (Wave)

I am looking at the following exercise:

Show that $a^n \mid b^n \Rightarrow a \mid b$.

According to my notes,it is like that:

Let $a^n \mid b^n$.

Let $d=(a,b)$

Then, $a=d \cdot a_1 \\ b=d \cdot b_1$

$$(a_1,b_1)=1$$

$$b^n=k \cdot a^n, \text{ for a } k \in \mathbb{Z}$$

$$d^n \cdot b_1^n=k \cdot d^n \cdot a_1^n \Rightarrow b_1^n=k \cdot a_1^n$$

Therefore, $$ a_1 \mid b_1^n=\underset{n}{\underbrace{b_1 \cdot b_1 \cdots b_1}} \overset{(a_1,b_1)=1}{\Rightarrow} a_1 \mid \underset{n-1}{\underbrace{b_1 \cdot b_1 \cdots b_1}} \Rightarrow a_1 \mid \underset{n-2}{\underbrace{b_1 \cdot b_1 \cdots b_1}} \Rightarrow a_1 \mid b_1$$

So,we conclude that $b_1=l \cdot a_1, l \in \mathbb{Z}$

$$d \cdot b_1=l \cdot d \cdot a_1 \Rightarrow b \mid a \Rightarrow a \mid b$$

But...is it right?? (Thinking) We show that $(a_1,b_1)=1$ and then we conclude that $a_1 \mid b_1$... (Wasntme) :confused:
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
evinda said:
But...is it right?? (Thinking) We show that $(a_1,b_1)=1$ and then we conclude that $a_1 \mid b_1$... (Wasntme) :confused:

Hi! (Happy)

Then that must mean that $a_1=1$ doesn't it? (Thinking)
 
I like Serena said:
Hi! (Happy)

Then that must mean that $a_1=1$ doesn't it? (Thinking)

Oh,yes! (Nod) So,the solution is right,or not?? (Thinking)
 
evinda said:
$$d \cdot b_1=l \cdot d \cdot a_1 \Rightarrow b \mid a \Rightarrow a \mid b$$

evinda said:
Oh,yes! (Nod) So,the solution is right,or not?? (Thinking)

Almost.
But from $d \cdot b_1=l \cdot d \cdot a_1$ we cannot conclude that $b \mid a$. (Doh)
It's a good thing we can conclude that $a \mid b$! (Mmm)
 
I like Serena said:
Almost.
But from $d \cdot b_1=l \cdot d \cdot a_1$ we cannot conclude that $b \mid a$. (Doh)
It's a good thing we can conclude that $a \mid b$! (Mmm)

Oh,sorry! (Blush)(Blush) I accidentally wrote it like that.I wanted to write:

$$d \cdot b_1=l \cdot d \cdot a_1 \Rightarrow b=l \cdot a \Rightarrow a \mid b$$

Thank you very much! (Smile)
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...

Similar threads

Replies
22
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
21K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Back
Top