Suppose a, b, and c ∈ Z and that gcd(a, b) = 1. If a | bc, then what is the gcd(a, c) and the gcd (b, c) ?
a | bc and gcd(a, b) = 1 => a | c => gcd(a, c) = a
for second part : a|c => c = ak gcd(b, c) = gcd(b, ak) = gcd(b, k) = gcd(b, c/a)
a|c means a is a divisor of c ... correct? and a | bc means a is a divisor/factor of b * c? not even sure of notation? any suggestions of resources to better understand this notation?
you're right ! you can also "read" it as : a | b means a divides b
where ever you see "|", replace it with the word "divides"
a divides b ? gawd...why has it taken me so long to see that notation?
yes to be more accurate : a|b means : "a divides b" evenly without any remainder...
does it mean "divides evenly" you read my mind:)
or "a goes into b" evenly without any remainder
how do I give you a medal:)
yep ! but i read it as "a divides b" ... evenly is implicit :)
thank you so much!
download this free pdf : http://worldtracker.org/media/library/Science/680%20maths%20books/Number%20theory/Elementary%20Number%20Theory%20-%20David%20M.%20Burton.pdf
refer to 2nd chapter
just started Abstract Algebra...I have heard it is a very hard course...even harder than linear alg or calc 2
oh i never took abstract algebra before.... im into engineering... but i dont think its tougher than analysis lol..
some day...i will take analysis:)
for me number theory itself is hard lol, let alone even think of abstract/analysis -.-
most ppl who take NT, abstract and analysis claim NT is the easy one :/
which of these must be true of my first question? it has to be b right? a. gcd(a, c) = 1. b. gcd(a, c) ≠ 1. c. gcd (b, c) = 1. d. gcd(b, c) ≠ 1.
Yep !
by any chance is it mentioned that \(a \ne 1\) for this question anywhere ?
thanks again man:)
no...it is not mention anywhere...that \[a \neq 1\]
I think that is why they put MUST in the question...
@rational did you ask me for help with something...I was at lunch
Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!