Divisibility
If divides , we write , and we write to mean that does not divide .
For example, and . But . In fact, all the divisors of are , , and .
There are a few simple properties.
Proof
A linear combinationlinear combination of integers of integers and is the sum of the form
where .
If and , then divides any linear combination of and .
Proof
The Division Algorithm
In (1.10), we call the dividend, the divisor, the quotient, and the remainder. The theorem, and the proof below, tells us only that and exist. It says nothing about how to find them, so it is technically not an algorithm, though the name says it is. We will show the algorithm later.
Proof
Existence. We want to use the well-ordering principle to yield the existence of such an . Define . Note that , and that is nonempty. To see this, consider . Since , and hence , we have
Therefore , so . By a variant of the well-ordering principle Proposition 1.1, has a least element . By the definition of , there exists such that . (In fact, these and are the ones we want.) Clearly . We need to show that . Assume, on the contrary, that . Then
Since , we have , which contradicts the fact that is the least element of . Therefore .
Uniqueness. (As a matter of fact, we have already gained the uniqueness of and of from the well-ordering principle, since is the least element of . But we may as well prove the uniqueness as follows.) Suppose that there exist such that
with and . Subtracting the two equations yields
By the given conditions, . Thus
Dividing by ,
Since , we must have and hence .
We can use the floor function to express the quotient and the remainder:
To see this, divide both sides of (1.10) by :
Since ,
which implies .
Let and . Show that
Proof
By Theorem 1.5, there exist such that
where . It then follows that
Since , we have
We still need to show that the greatest integer of is also .
On the other hand, can be written as
Thus
Dividing by ,
We want to show that . But and only give , so we need a tighter bound. We prove it by contradiction. Assume that . Then
Note that , so is the fractional part of . That is,
But we already have . This is a contradiction, so . It then follows from (1.11) that
This concludes the proof.
We are all familiar with even and odd numbers, maybe starting from kindergarten or elementary school. Ask yourself: what is an even number, and what is an odd number? “Divisible by ” could be one approach. Then how do we get that an even number has the form and an odd number the form ?
Below we give a clear definition.
We can then answer the and question using the division algorithm Theorem 1.5.
If is even, then by Theorem 1.5 there exists such that . On the other hand, the remainder when is divided by is . Therefore is even if and only if for some .
Similarly, is odd if and only if for some .
Greatest Common Divisors
The concept of the greatest common divisor is crucial in number theory. If integers and are not both zero, then at least one of the sets of factors and is finite. (The set of factors of is , which is infinite.) Thus the set of common divisors is finite, and hence it is feasible to take the maximum element of , , which is the greatest common divisor.
Here are some examples: , , , , and for every nonzero integer .
We are particularly interested in pairs of integers that share no common divisor larger than . Equivalently, the only common divisors are .
Exercises
Hint: This is a very interesting exercise in that you need to apply the method of construction. Recall the linear recurrence relation of degree .
Proof
Let sequences and be defined by
And let
Our goal is to show that is odd. A quick observation: , and hence for all . As gets larger, may be neglected. So mainly contributes to . In fact, we want to show that is an integer, and moreover even.
Note that and are the two roots of the equation
Thus, by Proposition 1.9, the sequence satisfies the recurrence
We may find and :
It is easy to show by mathematical induction that is even for all .
Since , we have
Rearrange the terms:
This exactly says that
Since is even, is odd.