Number Theory/Elementary Divisibility

Elementary Properties of Divisibility

edit

Divisibility is a key concept in number theory. We say that an integer   is divisible by a nonzero integer   if there exists an integer   such that  .

For example, the integer 123456 is divisible by 643 since there exists a nonzero integer, namely 192, such that  .

We denote divisibility using a vertical bar:   means "a divides b". For example, we can write  .

If   is not divisible by  , we write  . For example,  .

The following theorems illustrate a number of important properties of divisibility.

Theorem 1

edit

Suppose   and   are integers and   and  . Then  .

Proof:

Let   and   be integers and suppose   and  . Then there exist integers   and   such that   and  . Thus

 

We know that   is also an integer, hence  .

Corollary

edit

Suppose   and   are integers and   and  . Then   and  .

Proof: Letting   and   in Theorem 1 yields  . Similarly, letting   and   yields  . Finally, setting s=0, yields  .

Theorem 2

edit

If   are integers, and   and  , then  .

Proof:

Let   and   are integers, and suppose   and  . Then   and   for some integers   and  .

Then  , and hence  .

Theorem 3

edit

Let   be integers. Then   if and only if  

Proof:

Let   be integers. Suppose  .

Then there exists an integer   such that

 .

So it follows that

  and hence  .

For the reverse direction, we suppose  .

Then there exists an integer   such that

 , so  

We know that c is non-zero, hence

  i.e.,  . Thus,  .

Prime and composite numbers

edit

A natural number p greater than one is a prime number if it has exactly two distinct natural number divisors, itself and 1. The first eleven such numbers are 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, and 31. There are an infinite number of primes, however, as will be proven below.

A natural number greater than one that is not prime is composite. Thus, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15 and 16 are the first few composite numbers.

Note that the number 1 is the only natural number that is neither prime nor composite.

Theorem 4

edit

Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic (FTA)

Every composite positive integer n is a product of prime numbers. Moreover, these products are unique up to the order of the factors.

Proof:

We prove this theorem by contradiction.

Suppose there exists a positive composite integer that is not a product of prime numbers; let N be the smallest such integer. Since N is composite, it can be written as N = a b for some integers a and b with a, b > 1.

Since N is not a product of primes, at least one of a and b is not a product of primes; without loss of generality, let's say a is not a product of primes.

Then, since a>1, a is composite, and hence a is a positive composite number that is not a product of prime numbers.

But, since a<N this contradicts our assumption that N is the smallest such number.

Hence, there does not exist a smallest such number, and therefore there do not exist composite positive integers which are not the product of prime numbers.

Proof of uniqueness is left to the reader.

Alternative Proof:

This is an inductive proof.

The statement "k is composite implies that k is a product of prime numbers" is true when  .

Let   be an integer  .

Suppose the statement is true for all  .

  is either composite or prime. If   is prime, then the statement is true for  

If   is composite, then   is divisible by some prime  , so   can be written k=pa where p is prime and a is an integer with  . Then a is either prime, or composite; if it is composite, then it is a product of prime numbers by our induction hypothesis.

Hence   can be written as a product of primes.

It follows that the statement is true for all   and hence by induction for all  .

Proof of uniqueness is left to the reader.

Theorem 5

edit

There are infinitely many primes.

Proof:

Suppose that there are only   primes.

Let these primes be:  .

Let   Then either   is prime, or it is a product of primes. If is is a product of primes, it must be divisible by a prime   for some  . However,   which is clearly not an integer:   is not divisible by  . Hence,   is not a product of primes.

This is a contradiction, as by Theorem 4, all numbers can be expressed as a product of primes.

Therefore, either   is prime or it is divisible by some prime greater than  .

We conclude that the assumption that there are only   primes is false.

Thus there are not a finite number of primes, i.e., there are infinitely many primes.

Theorem 6

edit

The Division Algorithm (Division with smallest non-negative remainder)

Let a and b be integers where  . Then there exist uniquely determined integers q and r such that

 

and  .

Proof:

We define the set

 

which is nonempty and bounded from above. Hence it has a maximal element which we denote by q.

We set  . It is   and  , because otherwise

 .

This implies

 

which contradicts to the maximality of q in M.

We now prove the uniqueness of q and r:

Let   and   be two integers which satisfy   and  . It is

 

and thus   which implies  . This also shows   and we are done.

Index