This preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.
View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: 4400/6400 PROBLEM SET 0 0) Proof of Fermat’s Last Theorem, Step 0 : For a positive integer n , let FLT ( n ) denote the following statement: for x,y,z ∈ Z such that x n + y n = z n , xyz = 0. Show that if FLT(4) holds and FLT( p ) holds for each odd prime p , then FLT( n ) holds for all n ≥ 3. 1) Divisibility in Commutative Rings : For elements x,y of a commutative ring R , we define x  y (read as “ x divides y ”) to mean: there exists z ∈ R such that zx = y . This is binary relation on R . a) Give a complete description of the divisibility relation on the field of rational numbers Q . (Note: the point is that this is trivial.) For the remainder of this problem, let a,b,c be integers. b) Show that any integer a divides 0, but 0 divides only itself. c) Suppose a  b and a  c . Show that a  ( b + c ) and a  ( b c ). d) Suppose a  b and a does not divide c . Show that a does not divide b + c . e) Suppose a does not divide b and a does not divide c . What can we conclude about whether a divides b + c ? 2) Divisibility Tests a) Show that 7 divides a positive integer 10 a + b if and only if 7 divides a 2 b . Explain why this gives a test for divisibility by 7. b) Can you find a similar divisibility test for, say, 13? 3) Divisbility as a partial ordering : A relation R on a set is a partial or dering if it satisfies the following axioms: (PO1) xRx for all x (reflexivity) (PO2) If xRy and yRx then x = y (antisymmetry) (PO3) If xRy and yRz then xRz (transitivity) A partial ordering is total or linear if for any pair of elements x,y , either xRy or yRx holds (“ comparability ”). a) Note that the usual ≤ relation on the real numbers is a total ordering, hence endows every subset of the real numbers with a total ordering. In particular, the natural numbers N are totally ordered under ≤ . 1 b) For each of the following subsets of R , determine whether the divisibility relation is a partial ordering and/or a total ordering: (i) The set Z + of positive integers. (ii) The set N of nonnegative integers. (iii) The set Z of all integers. 1 I’m not sure that there is anything to show here, but write a sentence or two to indicate that you understand the statement. 1 2 4400/6400 PROBLEM SET 0 4) Irrationality of √ 3: Adapt the proof given in class of the irrationality of √ 2 to show the irrationality of √ 3. (You can either phrase the argument in terms of infinite descent, or start by reducing to lowest terms, according to your taste.) Make sure you give a complete proof of the fact that 3  x 2 implies 3  x and that your proof does not assume the uniqueness of factorization into primes. 4.5) Irrationality of √ p : It is in fact true that for any prime number p , √ p is irrational....
View
Full
Document
This note was uploaded on 10/26/2011 for the course MATH 4400 taught by Professor Staff during the Spring '11 term at University of Georgia Athens.
 Spring '11
 Staff
 Number Theory

Click to edit the document details