Bashyboy
- 1,419
- 5
I tried to prove this claim, as I require it to finish one of my proofs.
By definition, if a,b are integers, with a \ne 0, we say that a divides b if there exists an integer c such that b = ca.
So, n divides 0 means that there exists some integer c such that n = c*0 = 0. But this would contradict the fact that n can't be zero.
What is wrong with this proof?
By definition, if a,b are integers, with a \ne 0, we say that a divides b if there exists an integer c such that b = ca.
So, n divides 0 means that there exists some integer c such that n = c*0 = 0. But this would contradict the fact that n can't be zero.
What is wrong with this proof?