# 8.5: Applications in Number Theory

$$\newcommand{\vecs}{\overset { \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} }$$ $$\newcommand{\vecd}{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}}$$$$\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}$$ $$\newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}$$ $$\newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}$$ $$\newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}$$ $$\newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}$$ $$\newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}$$ $$\newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}$$ $$\newcommand{\norm}{\| #1 \|}$$ $$\newcommand{\inner}{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}$$ $$\newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}$$ $$\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}$$ $$\newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}$$ $$\newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}$$ $$\newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}$$ $$\newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}$$ $$\newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}$$ $$\newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}$$ $$\newcommand{\norm}{\| #1 \|}$$ $$\newcommand{\inner}{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}$$ $$\newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}$$$$\newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}$$

Induction (or the fact that $$\mathbb{N}$$ is well-ordered) can be used to prove many important properties of natural numbers. Here are just three examples.

## Definition $$8.5.1$$.

An element $$p$$ of $$\mathbb{N}^{+}$$ is prime iff $$p > 1$$ and $$p$$ is not divisible by any element of $$\mathbb{N}^{+}$$ other than 1 and $$p$$.

## Proposition $$8.5.2$$.

If $$n \in \mathbb{N}$$ and $$n > 1$$, then $$n$$ is divisible by a prime number.

Proof

Suppose there is some natural number $$n > 1$$, such that $$n$$ is not divisible by a prime number. (This will lead to a contradiction.) Since $$\mathbb{N}$$ is well-ordered, we may assume that $$n$$ is the smallest such number, so: $\text { If } 1<k<n \text { (and } k \in \mathbb{N} \text { ), then } k \text { is divisible by a prime number. }$

Since $$n \mid n$$, but (by assumption) $$n$$ is not divisible by any prime number, we know that $$n$$ is not prime. By definition, this means there exists $$k \in \mathbb{N}$$, such that $$k \mid n$$ and $$1 < k < n$$. From the minimality of $$n$$, we know that $$k$$ is divisible by some prime number $$p$$. Then $$p \mid k$$ and $$k \mid n$$, so $$p \mid n$$. This contradicts the fact that $$n$$ is not divisible by a prime number.

## Theorem $$8.5.3$$ (Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic).

Every natural number (other than 0 and 1) is a product of prime numbers (or is itself a prime).

Proof

BY CONTRADITION: Suppose there is some natural number $$n > 1$$, such that $$n$$ is not a product of prime numbers (and is not a prime). Since $$\mathbb{N}$$ is well-ordered, we may assume that $$n$$ is the smallest such number, so: $\text { If } 1<k<n \text { (and } k \in \mathbb{N}), \text { then } k \text { is a product of prime numbers. }$

Since $$n$$ is not prime, it is divisible by some natural number $$k$$, with $$1 < k < n$$. This means we may write $$n = km$$, for some $$m \in \mathbb{N}^{+}$$. Since $$m = n / k$$ and $$1 < k < n$$, we see that $$1 < m < n$$. Therefore, the minimality of $$n$$ implies that $$k$$ and $$m$$ are products of prime numbers: say $$k=p_{1} p_{2} \cdots p_{r}$$ and $$m=q_{1} q_{2} \cdots q_{s}$$. Then $n=k m=\left(p_{1} p_{2} \cdots p_{r}\right)\left(q_{1} q_{2} \cdots q_{s}\right)$

is a product of prime numbers. This is a contradiction.

## Remark $$8.5.4$$.

In fact, every natural number can be written in only one way as a product of prime numbers (up to rearranging the order of the factors), but we will not prove this fact.

## Definition $$8.5.5$$.

Let $$a, b \in \mathbb{N}^{+}$$. We say $$a$$ and $$b$$ are relatively prime iff they have no divisors in common, other than 1. (I.e., if $$k \in \mathbb{N}^{+}$$, and $$k$$ is a divisor of both $$a$$ and $$b$$, then $$k = 1$$. In other words, the “greatest common divisor” of $$a$$ and $$b$$ is 1.)

## Theorem $$8.5.6$$.

Let $$a, b \in \mathbb{N}^{+}$$. If $$a$$ and $$b$$ are relatively prime, then there exist $$m, n \in \mathbb{Z}$$, such that $$ma + nb = 1$$.

Proof

Let $S=\{m a+n b \mid m, n \in \mathbb{Z} k=\} \cap \mathbb{N}^{+} .$

It is easy to see that $$a \in S$$ (by letting $$m = 1$$ and $$n = 0$$), so $$S \neq \varnothing$$. Therefore, since $$\mathbb{N}$$ is well-ordered, we may let $$d$$ be the smallest element of $$S$$. Then $$d \in S$$, so we have $$d = m_{0}a+n_{0}b$$ for some $$m_{0}, n_{0} \in \mathbb{Z}$$.

By the Division Algorithm $$(5.1.20)$$, we may write $a=q d+r \text { with } 0 \leq r<d .$

So $r=a-q d=a-q\left(m_{0} a+n_{0} b\right)=\left(1-q m_{0}\right) a+q n_{0} b=m a+n b ,$

where $$m = 1 − qm \in \mathbb{Z}$$ and $$n = qn \in \mathbb{Z}$$. On the other hand, since $$r < d$$, and $$d$$ is the smallest element of $$S$$, we know $$r \notin S$$. From the definition of $$S$$, we conclude that $$r = 0$$. So $$d \mid a$$.

By repeating the same argument with $$a$$ and $$b$$ interchanged (and $$m_{0}$$ and $$n_{0}$$ also interchanged) we see that $$d \mid b$$.

Therefore, $$d$$ is a divisor of both $$a$$ and $$b$$. Since $$a$$ and $$b$$ are relatively prime, we conclude that $$d = 1$$. Since $$d \in S$$, this means $$1 \in S$$, which establishes the desired conclusion.

## Exercise $$8.5.7$$.

Prove the converse of Theorem $$8.5.6$$.

Theorem $$8.5.6$$ is of fundamental importance in Number Theory, the mathematical study of properties of $$\mathbb{N}$$ and $$\mathbb{Z}$$. Here are a few of its many consequences:

## Exercise $$8.5.8$$.

Assume $$a, b \in \mathbb{N}^{+}$$.

1. Show $$a$$ and $$b$$ are relatively prime iff there exists $$x \in \mathbb{Z}$$, such that $$x a \equiv 1(\bmod b)$$.
2. Show $$a$$ and $$b$$ are relatively prime iff for all $$y \in \mathbb{Z}$$, there exists $$x \in \mathbb{Z}$$, such that $$x a \equiv y(\bmod b)$$.
3. (Chinese Remainder Theorem) Suppose $$a$$ and $$b$$ are relatively prime. For all $$y_{1}, y_{2} \in \mathbb{Z}$$, show there exists $$x \in \mathbb{Z}$$, such that $$x \equiv y_{1}(\bmod a)$$ and $$x \equiv y_{2}(\bmod b)$$.

Proposition $$8.5.2$$ also has important consequences. For example:

## Corollary $$8.5.9$$.

There are infinitely many prime numbers.

Proof

BY CONTRADICTION: Suppose there are only finitely many prime numbers. Then we can make a list of all of them: $\text { The set of all prime numbers is }\left\{p_{1}, p_{2}, \ldots, p_{n}\right\} .$

Let $N=p_{1} p_{2} \cdots p_{n} .$

From Proposition $$8.5.2$$, we know there is some prime $$p$$, such that $$p \mid (N + 1)$$.

Since $$p_{1}, p_{2}, \ldots, p_{n}$$ is a list of all the prime numbers, we know $$p = p_{i}$$, for some $$i$$. Therefore $$p = p_{i}$$ is one of the factors in the product that defines $$N$$, so $$p \mid N$$. Therefore, $$p$$ divides both $$N$$ and $$N + 1$$, so (from $$5.1.9(1)$$) we have $p \mid((N+1)-N)=1 .$

This implies $$p = \pm 1$$ (see page 97), which contradicts the fact that $$p$$, being a prime number, must be $$> 1$$.

This page titled 8.5: Applications in Number Theory is shared under a CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Dave Witte Morris & Joy Morris.