Results 1 to 6 of 6

Math Help - equation

  1. #1
    Senior Member Sampras's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2009
    Posts
    301

    equation

    Show that  (m,n) = 1 \Rightarrow (m) \cap (n) = (mn) . so  mx+ny = 1 . Now  (m) = \{cm: c \in R \} and  (n) = \{dm: d \in R \} . So show that there is some common element which implies that they must be equal?
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    Super Member
    Joined
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    678
    Thanks
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Sampras View Post
    Show that  (m,n) = 1 \Rightarrow (m) \cap (n) = (mn) . so  mx+ny = 1 . Now  (m) = \{cm: c \in R \} and  (n) = \{dm: d \in R \} . So show that there is some common element which implies that they must be equal?

    I think you meant  (n) = \{dn: d \in Z \}

    Let me prove the following for you

    if m|x and n|x then mn|[\gcd(m,n)x]

    we have k_1m+k_2n = \gcd(m,n)
    = xk_1m+xk_2n = x\gcd(m,n)

    Now mn|LHS of the equation above. Hence the result.

    In this case gcd(m,n)=1, so mn|x Hence the result
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    Senior Member Sampras's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2009
    Posts
    301
    Quote Originally Posted by aman_cc View Post
    I think you meant  (n) = \{dn: d \in Z \}

    Let me prove the following for you

    if m|x and n|x then mn|[\gcd(m,n)x]

    we have k_1m+k_2n = \gcd(m,n)
    = xk_1m+xk_2n = x\gcd(m,n)

    Now mn|LHS of the equation above. Hence the result.

    In this case gcd(m,n)=1, so mn|x Hence the result
    Can you use fact that either  (m) \cap (n) is disjoint or equal? Thus show that if there is some element in  (m) \cap (n) then  (m) = (n) ? Thus  (m) \cap (n) = (mn) ?
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  4. #4
    Super Member
    Joined
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    678
    Thanks
    1
    Sorry - but unable to follow you question completely.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  5. #5
    Senior Member Sampras's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2009
    Posts
    301
    Quote Originally Posted by aman_cc View Post
    I think you meant  (n) = \{dn: d \in Z \}

    Let me prove the following for you

    if m|x and n|x then mn|[\gcd(m,n)x]

    we have k_1m+k_2n = \gcd(m,n)
    = xk_1m+xk_2n = x\gcd(m,n)

    Now mn|LHS of the equation above. Hence the result.

    In this case gcd(m,n)=1, so mn|x Hence the result
    How does this show the result?
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  6. #6
    Super Member
    Joined
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    678
    Thanks
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Sampras View Post
    How does this show the result?
    Hi - Maybe I am not getting your question, but here is the logic I have used.

    We have proved if m|x and n|x then => mn|x

    So let
    1. x in (m) and x in (n) => x in (mn)
    2. x in (mn) => x in (m) and x in (n)

    Hence
    <br />
(m) \cap (n) = (mn)

    Essentially all I am saying is (m) \cap (n) = (LCM(mn))<br /> <br />
    Last edited by aman_cc; October 14th 2009 at 06:16 AM. Reason: latex tag error
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: April 11th 2011, 02:17 AM
  2. Partial differential equation-wave equation - dimensional analysis
    Posted in the Differential Equations Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: August 28th 2009, 12:39 PM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: May 18th 2009, 01:51 PM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: April 28th 2009, 07:42 AM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: October 23rd 2008, 04:39 AM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum