% Created 2023-01-18 Wed 12:13 % Intended LaTeX compiler: pdflatex \documentclass[11pt]{article} \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc} \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} \usepackage{graphicx} \usepackage{longtable} \usepackage{wrapfig} \usepackage{rotating} \usepackage[normalem]{ulem} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{capt-of} \usepackage{hyperref} \noindent \notag \usepackage{ dsfont } \author{Logan Hunt} \date{\today} \title{Assignment One} \hypersetup{ pdfauthor={Logan Hunt}, pdftitle={Assignment One}, pdfkeywords={}, pdfsubject={}, pdfcreator={Emacs 28.2 (Org mode 9.5.5)}, pdflang={English}} \begin{document} \maketitle \tableofcontents \section{Section 1.1} \label{sec:org35f7eb6} \subsection{Question 5} \label{sec:orge503259} By reforming the given expression to show \(ca\) as a multiple of \(q\) and some remainder: \begin{align} a = bq + r \\ ca = (cb)q + (c)r \end{align} and that \(0 \leq r < b \Rightarrow 0 \leq cr < cb\), Theorem 1.1 tells us that there is only one unique quotient: which is \(q\), and the remainder is \((c)r\). \subsection{Question 7} \label{sec:org6afde38} By Theorem 1.1, \(a = bq + r, 0 \leq r \lt b\) implies that when b = 3, \(a = 3q + r\) where \(0 \leq r \lt b\), thus \(a \in \mathds{Z} \Rightarrow a = 3q + r\) where \(r \in {0,1,2}\). By squaring \(a\), we have three options which simplify to the form \(3k\) or \(3k + 1\): \begin{enumerate} \item \(a^2 = (3q)^2 = 9q^2\) which is \(3k \ni k = 3q^2\) \item \(a^2 = (3q + 1)^2 = 9q^2 + 3q + 1 = 3(3q^2 + q) + 1\) which is \(3k + 1 \ni k = (3q^2 + q)\) \item \(a^2 = (3q + 2)^2 = 9q^2 + 6q + 4 = 3(3q^2 + 2q) + 4\) which is \(3l + 4 \ni l = (3q^2 + 2q)\) which is also \(3l + 1 + 3 = 3(l+1) + 1\), which again is \(3k + 1 \ni k = l+1\) \end{enumerate} \subsection{Question 8} \label{sec:orgfe8a512} By Theorem 1.1, \(a = bq + r, 0 \leq r \lt b\) implies that when b = 4, \(a = 4q + r\) where \(0 \leq r \lt b\), and thus \(a = 4q + r\) and \(r \in {0,1,2,3}\). Therefore we have four cases: \begin{enumerate} \item \(a = 4q\), and \(a\) must be even which is invalid \item \(a = 4q + 1\), and \(4q + 1 = 2k + 1 \ni k = 2q\) which fits the definition of an odd number \item \(a = 4q + 2\), thus \(a\) must be even as \(a = 2k \ni k = 2q + 1\) \item \(a = 4q + 3\), can be rewritten to \(4q + 1 + 2\), which is odd: \(2k + 1 \ni k = 2q + 1\) \end{enumerate} And thus any odd number can be rewritten as \(4q + 1\) or \(4q + 3\). \subsection{Question 10} \label{sec:org3c66372} The division of \(a\) and \(c\) by \(n\) can each be represented by \begin{align} a = q_{a}n + r_a \\ c = q_c_{}n + r_c \end{align} where \(0 \le r_a < n\) and \(0 \le r_c < n\) by Theorem 1.1, and we can subtract each side of the second equation from the first: \begin{align} a - c = (q_{a}n + r_a) - (q_c_{}n + r_c) \end{align} With this work now in hand, we will prove by showing that the conjecture is true both ways: For the first, we will suppose that \(r_a = r_c\). Then, we find that \begin{align} a - c = n(q_a - q_c) \\ a - c = nk \end{align} for some integer \(k\). For the second, we will prove that if \(a - c = nk\), when \(a\) and \(c\) are divided by \(n\), they leave the same remainder \(r\). From the work we did previously, and by substituting \(a-c = nk\), we find that \begin{align} a - c = (q_{a}n + r_a) - (q_c_{}n + r_c) \\ nk = (q_{a}n + r_a) - (q_{c}n + r_c) \\ nk = n(q_a - q_c) + (r_a - r_c) \\ n(k - q_a + q_c) = r_a - r_c \end{align} and thus \(r_a - r_c\) is a multiple of \(n\). From the inequalities produced previously by Theorem 1.1, if \(r_a \geq r_c\) then \(0 \le r_a - r_c < n\) and \(-n < r_c - r_a \leq 0\). Else if \(r_c \geq r_a\) then \(0 \leq r_c - r_a < n\) and \(-n < r_a - r_c \leq 0\). By combining the two cases, it must be that \$ -n < r\textsubscript{a} - r\textsubscript{c} < n \$, and from the above fact that \(r_a - r_c\) is a multiple of n, the only multiple of n in \((-n, n)\) is 0. Thus \(r_a = r_c\). \section{Section 1.2} \label{sec:org4226083} \subsection{Question 1} \label{sec:org4ccc206} \subsubsection{c} \label{sec:org802af33} 1, 57 and 112 are co-prime \subsection{Question 3} \label{sec:orgb341781} \begin{align} a | b \Rightarrow \exists n \in \mathds{Z} \ni an = b \\ b | c \Rightarrow \exists m \in \mathds{Z} \ni bm = c \\ (an)m = c \Rightarrow a | c \end{align} \subsection{Question 4} \label{sec:orge55e932} \subsubsection{a} \label{sec:org7540edc} \begin{align} a | b \Rightarrow \exists n \in \mathds{Z} \ni an = b \\ a | c \Rightarrow \exists m \in \mathds{Z} \ni am = c \\ a | (b + c) \Rightarrow \exists l \in \mathds{Z} \ni al = b + c \\ al = an + am \\ b + c = a(n + m) \Rightarrow a | b+c \end{align} \subsubsection{b} \label{sec:orge72f7c4} By continuing from "a": \begin{align} br + ct = (an)r + (am)t \\ \Rightarrow br + ct = a(nr + mt) \\ \Rightarrow a | (br + ct) \end{align} \subsection{Question 7} \label{sec:org7273a90} \(|a|\) since \(|a| \textbar a\) and \(|a| \textbar 0\), and there cannot be an integer larger than \(|a|\) that divides \(a\). \subsection{Question 9} \label{sec:org6b4815b} No, not every multiple of two factors of an integer divides that integer. For example, \(3 | 9\) and \(9 | 9\) but \(27 \nmid 9\). \subsection{Question 15} \label{sec:orgf96c6cd} \subsubsection{c} \label{sec:orgad14e2b} \begin{align} 1003 = (2)(456) + 91 \\ 456 = (5)(91) + 1 \\ 91 = (91)(1) + 0 \\ \Rightarrow (1003, 456) = 1 \end{align} \subsubsection{d} \label{sec:orgf89fea4} \begin{align} 322 = (2)(148) + 26 \\ 148 = (5)(26) + 18 \\ 26 = (1)(18) + 8 \\ 18 = (2)(8) + 2 \\ 8 = (4)(2) + 0 \\ \Rightarrow (322, 148) = 2 \end{align} \subsection{Question 17} \label{sec:org66d011a} \begin{align} a | c \Rightarrow \exists n \in \mathds{Z} \ni an = c \\ b | c \Rightarrow b | an \end{align} And by Theorem 1.4, \((a, b) = 1 \Rightarrow b | n \Rightarrow ab | an \Rightarrow ab | c\): \subsection{Question 19} \label{sec:org905b244} Given some \(d\) such that \(d | a\) and \(d | b\), then \(a = nd\) and \(b = md\). \begin{align} a | (b + c) \Rightarrow \exists p \in \mathds{Z} \ni ap = b + c \\ c = ap - md \Rightarrow c = (nd)p - md \Rightarrow c = d(np - md) \Rightarrow d | c \end{align} Since we're given that \((b, c) = 1 \Rightarrow (md, c) = 1\) and from the above fact that \(d | c\), we can conclude that \(md = 1\). Therefore \((a, b) = (a, md) = (a, 1) = 1\). Given some \(e\) such that \(e | a\) and \(e | c\), then \(a = ue\) and \(c = we\). \begin{align} a | (b + c) \Rightarrow \exists o \in \mathds{Z} \ni ao = b + c \\ b = ao - we \Rightarrow b = (ue)o - we \Rightarrow b = e(uo - w) \Rightarrow e | b \end{align} And from similar reasoning we can conclude that \((a, c) = (a, we) = (a, 1) = 1\). \subsection{Question 31} \label{sec:orgc12b666} \subsubsection{a} \label{sec:org4312735} \([6, 10] = 60\) \([4, 5, 6, 10] = 60\) \([20, 42] = 840\) \([2, 3, 14, 36, 42] = 252\) \subsubsection{b} \label{sec:orgb964c2c} Let \(m = [a_1, a_2, \ldots, a_k]\), then by the Division Algorithm, \(t = mq + r\) for integers \(q\) and \(r\), with \(0 \leq r < m\). As given that all \(a_i | t\) \(\Rightarrow\) \(a_i | mq + r\), and as \(mq\) is a multiple of the LCM including a\textsubscript{i}, \(a_i\) must divide \(mq\), and thus \(a_i | r\). Because \(a_i | r\), \(r = na_i\) and is thus a multiple of all \(a_i\), but the above statement that \(0 \leq r < m\) shows that \(m\) - the LCM by definition - is greater than \(r\). Therefore, \(r = 0\) and \(t = mq \Rightarrow m | t\). \end{document}