Show that x-a,x-b are co-primes

  • MHB
  • Thread starter evinda
  • Start date
In summary, we prove that $x-a$ and $x-b$ are co-primes by showing that any common divisor $f(x)$ must either have degree 0 or 1. If $deg f(x)=1$, then we can write $f(x)=x-c$ where $c$ is a unit in $K$. If $deg f(x)=0$, then $f(x)=c$ where $c$ is a unit in $K$. In both cases, we can show that $f(x)|1$, which means $f(x)$ is a unit and therefore the greatest common divisor of $x-a$ and $x-b$ is 1.
  • #1
evinda
Gold Member
MHB
3,836
0
Hello! :)

Knowing that $K$ is a field, $a,b \in K$ different from each other,show that $x-a,x-b$ co-primes.

We suppose that $\exists f(x) \in K(x)$ such that:

$f(x)|x-a$ and $f(x)|x-b$Then $deg f(x) \leq 1$

So, $deg f(x)=0 \text{ or } 1$

If $deg f(x)=1$:

$f(x)=x-c,c\in K$

$x-c|x-a , x-c|x-b \Rightarrow x-c| x-a-x+b \Rightarrow x-c|b-a$ contradiction,because that would mean $deg(x-c) \leq deg(b-a) \Rightarrow 1 \leq 0$

If $deg f(x)=0, f(x)=c,c \in K$

$c|x-a, c|x-b \Rightarrow c|b-a \Rightarrow c|(b-a)^{-1}(b-a) \Rightarrow c|1 \Rightarrow c=\pm 1$

So, $gcd(x-a,x-b)=1$.Do we suppose that $f(x)$ is the greatest common divisor of $x-a$ and $x-b$ or just a common divisor ? Also,at the case when $deg f(x)=1$,why do we take $f(x)=x-c$ ?? :confused:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Any polynomial in $K[x]$ of degree 1 is of the form:

$c_1x + c_0$.

Since it is of degree 1 (and not 0), we must have $c_1 \neq 0$, that is: $c_1 \in K^{\ast}$, so that $c_1$ is a unit (since $K$ is a field). Hence $c_1^{-1}$ exists in $K$, so we have:

$c_1x + c_0 = c_1(x + c_0c_1^{-1})$.

Since multiplying by a unit makes no difference to divisibility, we have:

$(c_1x + c_0)|g(x) \iff (x + c_0c_1^{-1})|g(x)$.

Letting $c = -c_0c_1^{-1}$, we see it suffices to consider $x - c$.

******

Yes, we only assume we have a common divisor, there is not need to suppose we have the greatest common divisor.

Recall as well, that the greatest common divisor is only unique up to a unit, so from:

$c|1$ all we can really conclude is that $c$ is a unit, which is all we need

(For example, in the field $\Bbb Q$ we have $4|1$ since: $1 = 4(\frac{1}{4})$).
 
  • #3
Hey! (Sun)

evinda said:
$c|x-a, c|x-b \Rightarrow c|b-a \Rightarrow c|(b-a)^{-1}(b-a) \Rightarrow c|1 \Rightarrow c=\pm 1$

Huh?? (Wondering)
How did you get that $c=\pm 1$?
I think the only thing you can say is that $c \in K^*$, which was already implicit.
Do we suppose that $f(x)$ is the greatest common divisor of $x-a$ and $x-b$ or just a common divisor ?

Just any divisor.
The point is that we prove that f(x) will have to be a unit in K.
Also,at the case when $deg f(x)=1$,why do we take $f(x)=x-c$ ?? :confused:

What alternative would you be able to pick?
 
  • #4
If $a\not = b$ then $b-a\not = 0$ and so,

$$ \tfrac1{b-a} \cdot (x-a) +(-\tfrac1{b-a}) \cdot (x-b) = 1$$
 
  • #5
I like Serena said:
How did you get that $c=\pm 1$?
I think the only thing you can say is that $c \in K^*$, which was already implicit.
How do we conclude that $c \in K^*$ ?? (Thinking)

I like Serena said:
Just any divisor.
The point is that we prove that f(x) will have to be a unit in K.
What alternative would you be able to pick?

I would pick $f(x)=ex+d$,but from this we could take $e^{-1}f(x)=x+e^{-1}d$,right? And then we have to set $-c=e^{-1}d$ ? (Thinking)
 
Last edited:
  • #6
Deveno said:
Any polynomial in $K[x]$ of degree 1 is of the form:

$c_1x + c_0$.

Since it is of degree 1 (and not 0), we must have $c_1 \neq 0$, that is: $c_1 \in K^{\ast}$, so that $c_1$ is a unit (since $K$ is a field). Hence $c_1^{-1}$ exists in $K$, so we have:

$c_1x + c_0 = c_1(x + c_0c_1^{-1})$.

Since multiplying by a unit makes no difference to divisibility, we have:

$(c_1x + c_0)|g(x) \iff (x + c_0c_1^{-1})|g(x)$.

Letting $c = -c_0c_1^{-1}$, we see it suffices to consider $x - c$.

******

Yes, we only assume we have a common divisor, there is not need to suppose we have the greatest common divisor.

I understand.. :)

Deveno said:
Recall as well, that the greatest common divisor is only unique up to a unit, so from:

$c|1$ all we can really conclude is that $c$ is a unit, which is all we need

(For example, in the field $\Bbb Q$ we have $4|1$ since: $1 = 4(\frac{1}{4})$).

I haven't understood why from the relation $c|1$,we conclude that $c$ is a unit..Could you explain it further to me? :confused:

- - - Updated - - -

ThePerfectHacker said:
If $a\not = b$ then $b-a\not = 0$ and so,

$$ \tfrac1{b-a} \cdot (x-a) +(-\tfrac1{b-a}) \cdot (x-b) = 1$$

And how do we conclude from this relation that the greatest common divisor is $1$? Because we can find $h_1(x),h_2(x) \in K(x)$ such that $h_1(x)(x-a)+h_2(x)(x-b)=1$ ??(Thinking)
 
  • #7
evinda said:
I
And how do we conclude from this relation that the greatest common divisor is $1$? Because we can find $h_1(x),h_2(x) \in K(x)$ such that $h_1(x)(x-a)+h_2(x)(x-b)=1$ ??(Thinking)

Yes. Two polynomials $f(x),g(x)$ are relatively prime if and only if $a(x)f(x) + b(x)g(x) = 1$.
 
  • #8
ThePerfectHacker said:
Yes. Two polynomials $f(x),g(x)$ are relatively prime if and only if $a(x)f(x) + b(x)g(x) = 1$.

I understand..thanks a lot! :)
 
  • #9
Deveno said:
$c|1$ all we can really conclude is that $c$ is a unit, which is all we need

Is it an identity that if $c|1$,it is a unit?? :confused:
 
  • #10
evinda said:
Is it an identity that if $c|1$,it is a unit?? :confused:

Let's see what they both mean.

$c$ is a unit if it has an inverse.
In a field every element except 0 has an inverse.

$c|1$ if there is a number $k$ in the field such that $kc=1$.
We can pick $k=c^{-1}$ satisfying the equation, which works for every element except 0.

So yes, if $c$ is an element of a field, then $c|1$ iff $c$ is a unit.
 
  • #11
I like Serena said:
Let's see what they both mean.

$c$ is a unit if it has an inverse.
In a field every element except 0 has an inverse.

$c|1$ if there is a number $k$ in the field such that $kc=1$.
We can pick $k=c^{-1}$ satisfying the equation, which works for every element except 0.

So yes, if $c$ is an element of a field, then $c|1$ iff $c$ is a unit.

I understand..Thank you very much! (Nod)
 

1. What does it mean for two numbers to be co-prime?

Two numbers are considered co-prime if they share no common factors other than 1. In other words, their greatest common divisor (GCD) is 1.

2. How do you prove that two numbers are co-prime?

To prove that two numbers, x-a and x-b, are co-prime, you need to show that their GCD is equal to 1. This can be done using the Euclidean algorithm, which involves finding the remainder when the larger number is divided by the smaller number. If the remainder is 1, then the numbers are co-prime.

3. Why is it important to show that x-a and x-b are co-prime?

This is often important in mathematical proofs and number theory. It allows us to simplify fractions and make calculations easier. In some cases, showing that two numbers are co-prime can also help us find the solutions to certain equations.

4. Can two numbers be co-prime if they are both even?

No, two numbers cannot be co-prime if they are both even. This is because they will have a common factor of 2, making their GCD greater than 1. However, two numbers can be co-prime if one is even and the other is odd.

5. Is it possible for x-a and x-b to be co-prime if a and b are both prime numbers?

Yes, it is possible for x-a and x-b to be co-prime if a and b are both prime numbers. This can occur when a and b are relatively close to each other, making their difference (x-a)-(x-b) relatively small. For example, 17 and 19 are both prime numbers and their difference is 2, making them co-prime.

Similar threads

  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
782
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
8
Views
893
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
2
Replies
52
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • Calculus
Replies
9
Views
2K
Back
Top