Solutions manual for NTB - 1.2 Ideals and greatest common divisors
Exercise 1.8. Let
be a non-empty set of integers that is closed under addition (i.e.,
for all
). Show that
is an ideal if and only if
for all
.
Proof
We prove
is an ideal implies
for all
and vice versa.
First, we show
is an ideal implies
for all
. Since
is an ideal so we have
for all
. Choose
, we get what we want to prove.
Now, we show
for all
implies
is an ideal. For all
, we have
(
times
) which belongs to
since
is closed under addition.
Similarly, for all
, we have
(
times
) which belongs to
since
is closed under addtion and
. So we have
for all
and for all
.
This proves
is an ideal.
.
with
, we have
.
Proof
We use proof by contradiction. Suppose
.
Then we have
and
. Hence
and
.
That means
is a common divisor of
and
. But
.
This is a contradiction. Therefore,
.
(q.e.d.)
Exercise 1.11. Let
be an integer. Show that if
are relatively prime integers, each of which divides
, then
divides
.
Proof
Before proving it, let's pause for a second and think about this problem. Is it just me or this problem is right by intuition? After two months studying number theory, I can tell you that not only this problem but most problems in this field are intuitively right. May this be the reason why number theory is so beautiful. Everybody can intuitively get it, but only somebody can intellectually prove it.
So how do we solve this exercise?
Well, we have
so let
for some
. We claim that
, hence
.
To prove
, observes that
and
, then applying Theorem 1.9, we got what we want to prove.
(q.e.d.)
Exercise 1.12. Show that two integers are relatively prime if and only if there is no one prime that divides both of them. Proof (This proof left blank because it is way too trivial) (q.e.d.)
Exercise 1.13. Let
be integers. Show that
if and only if
for
.
Proof
We show
implies
for
and vice versa.
First we show
implies
for
. We prove this by contradiction.
Suppose
such that
. We have
and
. Hence
is a common divisor of
and
. That means
. This is a contradiction. Therefore,
for
.
Now we show
for
implies
. Applying exercise 2.12, we see that there's no prime divides both
and
for
. That means there's no prime divides both
and
. Hence they are relatively prime.
(q.e.d.)
Exercise 1.14. Let
be a prime and
an integer, with
. Show that the binomial cofficient
,
which is an integer, is divisible by
.
Proof
We have:
for some
.
Since
, then we have
. Hence
. That means
for some
. Therefore,
.
(q.e.d.)
Exercise 1.15. An integer
is called square-free if it is not divisible by the square of any integer greater than 1. Show that:
(a)
is square-free if and only if
, where the
’s are distinct
primes;
(b) every positive integer
can be expressed uniquely as
, where
and
are positive integers, and
is square-free.
Proof
(q.e.d.)
(q.e.d.)
Exercise 1.9. Show that for all integers
, we have:
(a)
;
(b)
;
(c)
and
;
(d)
.
Proof
a, b, c are trivial and can be easily derived from the definition of greatest command divisor. We prove only d here.
We first show that
.
According to Theorem 1.8, there exist
such that
.
Then we have
.
Then once again, according to thereom 1.8, we have
.
Now we show that
.
Since
and
, we have
and
.
Hence
is a common divisor of
and
.
That means
.
Thus Exercise 1.9. Show that for all integers
(q.e.d.)
Exercise 1.10. Show that for all integers Exercise 1.11. Let
Exercise 1.12. Show that two integers are relatively prime if and only if there is no one prime that divides both of them. Proof (This proof left blank because it is way too trivial) (q.e.d.)
Exercise 1.13. Let
Exercise 1.14. Let
Exercise 1.15. An integer
Comments
ps: chẳng nhẽ blogspot cho phép viết công thức bằng latex?
về latex thì sao bạn không thử view image xem mấy cái công thức latex được làm bằng cách nào :-p
1. latex-fu của mình chưa có cao :-D
2. quan trọng hơn, mình muốn gửi lên đây để mọi người đánh giá trước, khi nào okie hết rồi thì mới xuất bản một lần luôn.
Thân.
@Anon2: hahah latex-fu nghĩa là kung-fu latex mình còn kém quá, nên chưa có dám thi triển võ công đó mà :-P
p/s: I'm trying to use my newbie English-fu to leave a comment on your blog :))
p/s: I'm trying to use my newbie English-fu to leave a comment on your blog :))
Thật tốt khi anh viết solution của cuốn này trên mạng dù mới có 1.1 --> 1.3. Em cũng đang học cuốn này.
À em có ý kiến nhỏ về bài 1.8. Nhìn chung thì em nghĩ là đúng rồi.
Nhưng trường hợp z = 0 thì là phải xét riêng để a + (-a) = 0 chứ không thể gộp chung với z > 0 được. Em nghĩ vậy.