What is the problem here (all integers are irrational proof…I think so)?How do we prove $n^n mid m^m Rightarrow n mid m$?Catalan constant is irrational. What is wrong with this proof?The contradiction method used to prove that the square root of a prime is irrationalComplex Exponential False “Proof” That All Integers Are $0$Understanding the proof of “$sqrt2$ is irrational” by contradiction.Prime Factors of the Composit Terms of Arithmetic ProgressionsIs there a quicker proof to show that $2^10^k equiv 7 pmod9$ for all positive integers $k$?Prove the sqrt of 4 is irrational, where did I go wrong?A Proof of the Fundamental Theorem of ArithmeticInteger factors of rational and irrational numbersProof verification: Prove $sqrtn$ is irrational.

If a player tries to persuade somebody, what should that creature roll not to be persuaded?

Draw a line nicely around notes

What systems of robust steganography are out there?

Using two linked programs, output ordinal numbers up to n

Why limit to revolvers?

Doing research in academia and not liking competition

In Adventurers League, is there any way for an 5th-level wizard to gain heavy armor proficiency?

What do these three diagonal lines that cross through three measures and both staves mean, and what are they called?

Is this artwork (used in a video game) real?

What to look for in climbing shoes?

I do not have power to all my breakers

Fastest way to look up an entity with a set of components?

What is the superlative of ipse?

Is there a way to handmake alphabet pasta?

Can a Resident Assistant Be Told to Ignore a Lawful Order?

Why do candidates not quit if they no longer have a realistic chance to win in the 2020 US presidents election

What does it mean to fail a saving throw by 5 or more?

Animal Shelter Management C++

Why aren't globular clusters disk shaped

Why run a service as a system user?

Is this more than a packing puzzle?

Can a pizza stone be fixed after soap has been used to clean it?

Is it possible to cast two 9th level spells without taking a long rest in 5e?

Why is "dark" an adverb in this sentence?



What is the problem here (all integers are irrational proof…I think so)?


How do we prove $n^n mid m^m Rightarrow n mid m$?Catalan constant is irrational. What is wrong with this proof?The contradiction method used to prove that the square root of a prime is irrationalComplex Exponential False “Proof” That All Integers Are $0$Understanding the proof of “$sqrt2$ is irrational” by contradiction.Prime Factors of the Composit Terms of Arithmetic ProgressionsIs there a quicker proof to show that $2^10^k equiv 7 pmod9$ for all positive integers $k$?Prove the sqrt of 4 is irrational, where did I go wrong?A Proof of the Fundamental Theorem of ArithmeticInteger factors of rational and irrational numbersProof verification: Prove $sqrtn$ is irrational.






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








7












$begingroup$


Let us assume $a$ is an integer which is rational which implies $a=p/q$ (where $p$ and $q$ are integers and $q$ not equal to $0$). If $p$ and $q$ are not coprime, let us simplify the fraction so this it is (I don't know how to talk like mathematicians).



Which implies, $$a=b/c$$ (where $b$ and $c$ are coprime integers). Squaring on both sides,
beginalign
a^2&=b^2/c^2\
a^2c^2&=b^2
endalign

So $a^2$ is a factor of $b^2$, and also of $b$, due to the uniqueness of the fundamental theorem of arithmetic.
So,
beginalign
b &=a^2d tagwhere $d$ is an integer\
b^2 &= a^4d^2
endalign

But $b^2=a^2c^2$ So,
beginalign
a^2c^2 &= a^4d^2\
c^2 &= a^2d^2
endalign



So, $a^2$ is a factor of $c^2$ and $c$ due to the fundamental theorem of arithmetic. So $b$ and $c$ have $a^2$ as a common factor. But this contradicts the fact that $b$ and $c$ are coprime. This is because we have taken $a$ as a rational integer, so $a$ cannot be a rational integer.



What's wrong here (genuinely asking)?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$







  • 11




    $begingroup$
    "a^2 is a factor b^2 and b" You are right $a^2$ divides $b^2$, but why would it divide $b$?
    $endgroup$
    – Wojowu
    Jul 7 at 16:06






  • 7




    $begingroup$
    First error I spotted is that $a^2$ need not be a factor of $b$ just because it is a factor of $b^2$. Indeed, if $a=2$ and $b=2$, then $a^2=4$ is a factor of $b^2=4$ but $a^2=4$ is not a factor of $b=2$.
    $endgroup$
    – Dave
    Jul 7 at 16:06






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Also, it is clear that integers are rational because given any integer $a$ we can write $a=fraca1$.
    $endgroup$
    – Dave
    Jul 7 at 16:08






  • 4




    $begingroup$
    If b and c are coprime, and a=b/c, then what does c have to be?
    $endgroup$
    – pokep
    Jul 7 at 17:33






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    @Toolazytothinkofaname It is rather simple to spot the error. Substitute the variables by actual integers and find where the proof is wrong.
    $endgroup$
    – miracle173
    Jul 8 at 14:18

















7












$begingroup$


Let us assume $a$ is an integer which is rational which implies $a=p/q$ (where $p$ and $q$ are integers and $q$ not equal to $0$). If $p$ and $q$ are not coprime, let us simplify the fraction so this it is (I don't know how to talk like mathematicians).



Which implies, $$a=b/c$$ (where $b$ and $c$ are coprime integers). Squaring on both sides,
beginalign
a^2&=b^2/c^2\
a^2c^2&=b^2
endalign

So $a^2$ is a factor of $b^2$, and also of $b$, due to the uniqueness of the fundamental theorem of arithmetic.
So,
beginalign
b &=a^2d tagwhere $d$ is an integer\
b^2 &= a^4d^2
endalign

But $b^2=a^2c^2$ So,
beginalign
a^2c^2 &= a^4d^2\
c^2 &= a^2d^2
endalign



So, $a^2$ is a factor of $c^2$ and $c$ due to the fundamental theorem of arithmetic. So $b$ and $c$ have $a^2$ as a common factor. But this contradicts the fact that $b$ and $c$ are coprime. This is because we have taken $a$ as a rational integer, so $a$ cannot be a rational integer.



What's wrong here (genuinely asking)?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$







  • 11




    $begingroup$
    "a^2 is a factor b^2 and b" You are right $a^2$ divides $b^2$, but why would it divide $b$?
    $endgroup$
    – Wojowu
    Jul 7 at 16:06






  • 7




    $begingroup$
    First error I spotted is that $a^2$ need not be a factor of $b$ just because it is a factor of $b^2$. Indeed, if $a=2$ and $b=2$, then $a^2=4$ is a factor of $b^2=4$ but $a^2=4$ is not a factor of $b=2$.
    $endgroup$
    – Dave
    Jul 7 at 16:06






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Also, it is clear that integers are rational because given any integer $a$ we can write $a=fraca1$.
    $endgroup$
    – Dave
    Jul 7 at 16:08






  • 4




    $begingroup$
    If b and c are coprime, and a=b/c, then what does c have to be?
    $endgroup$
    – pokep
    Jul 7 at 17:33






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    @Toolazytothinkofaname It is rather simple to spot the error. Substitute the variables by actual integers and find where the proof is wrong.
    $endgroup$
    – miracle173
    Jul 8 at 14:18













7












7








7





$begingroup$


Let us assume $a$ is an integer which is rational which implies $a=p/q$ (where $p$ and $q$ are integers and $q$ not equal to $0$). If $p$ and $q$ are not coprime, let us simplify the fraction so this it is (I don't know how to talk like mathematicians).



Which implies, $$a=b/c$$ (where $b$ and $c$ are coprime integers). Squaring on both sides,
beginalign
a^2&=b^2/c^2\
a^2c^2&=b^2
endalign

So $a^2$ is a factor of $b^2$, and also of $b$, due to the uniqueness of the fundamental theorem of arithmetic.
So,
beginalign
b &=a^2d tagwhere $d$ is an integer\
b^2 &= a^4d^2
endalign

But $b^2=a^2c^2$ So,
beginalign
a^2c^2 &= a^4d^2\
c^2 &= a^2d^2
endalign



So, $a^2$ is a factor of $c^2$ and $c$ due to the fundamental theorem of arithmetic. So $b$ and $c$ have $a^2$ as a common factor. But this contradicts the fact that $b$ and $c$ are coprime. This is because we have taken $a$ as a rational integer, so $a$ cannot be a rational integer.



What's wrong here (genuinely asking)?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




Let us assume $a$ is an integer which is rational which implies $a=p/q$ (where $p$ and $q$ are integers and $q$ not equal to $0$). If $p$ and $q$ are not coprime, let us simplify the fraction so this it is (I don't know how to talk like mathematicians).



Which implies, $$a=b/c$$ (where $b$ and $c$ are coprime integers). Squaring on both sides,
beginalign
a^2&=b^2/c^2\
a^2c^2&=b^2
endalign

So $a^2$ is a factor of $b^2$, and also of $b$, due to the uniqueness of the fundamental theorem of arithmetic.
So,
beginalign
b &=a^2d tagwhere $d$ is an integer\
b^2 &= a^4d^2
endalign

But $b^2=a^2c^2$ So,
beginalign
a^2c^2 &= a^4d^2\
c^2 &= a^2d^2
endalign



So, $a^2$ is a factor of $c^2$ and $c$ due to the fundamental theorem of arithmetic. So $b$ and $c$ have $a^2$ as a common factor. But this contradicts the fact that $b$ and $c$ are coprime. This is because we have taken $a$ as a rational integer, so $a$ cannot be a rational integer.



What's wrong here (genuinely asking)?







elementary-number-theory fake-proofs






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Jul 8 at 14:00









Peter Mortensen

5783 silver badges10 bronze badges




5783 silver badges10 bronze badges










asked Jul 7 at 16:02









ToolazytothinkofanameToolazytothinkofaname

362 bronze badges




362 bronze badges







  • 11




    $begingroup$
    "a^2 is a factor b^2 and b" You are right $a^2$ divides $b^2$, but why would it divide $b$?
    $endgroup$
    – Wojowu
    Jul 7 at 16:06






  • 7




    $begingroup$
    First error I spotted is that $a^2$ need not be a factor of $b$ just because it is a factor of $b^2$. Indeed, if $a=2$ and $b=2$, then $a^2=4$ is a factor of $b^2=4$ but $a^2=4$ is not a factor of $b=2$.
    $endgroup$
    – Dave
    Jul 7 at 16:06






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Also, it is clear that integers are rational because given any integer $a$ we can write $a=fraca1$.
    $endgroup$
    – Dave
    Jul 7 at 16:08






  • 4




    $begingroup$
    If b and c are coprime, and a=b/c, then what does c have to be?
    $endgroup$
    – pokep
    Jul 7 at 17:33






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    @Toolazytothinkofaname It is rather simple to spot the error. Substitute the variables by actual integers and find where the proof is wrong.
    $endgroup$
    – miracle173
    Jul 8 at 14:18












  • 11




    $begingroup$
    "a^2 is a factor b^2 and b" You are right $a^2$ divides $b^2$, but why would it divide $b$?
    $endgroup$
    – Wojowu
    Jul 7 at 16:06






  • 7




    $begingroup$
    First error I spotted is that $a^2$ need not be a factor of $b$ just because it is a factor of $b^2$. Indeed, if $a=2$ and $b=2$, then $a^2=4$ is a factor of $b^2=4$ but $a^2=4$ is not a factor of $b=2$.
    $endgroup$
    – Dave
    Jul 7 at 16:06






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Also, it is clear that integers are rational because given any integer $a$ we can write $a=fraca1$.
    $endgroup$
    – Dave
    Jul 7 at 16:08






  • 4




    $begingroup$
    If b and c are coprime, and a=b/c, then what does c have to be?
    $endgroup$
    – pokep
    Jul 7 at 17:33






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    @Toolazytothinkofaname It is rather simple to spot the error. Substitute the variables by actual integers and find where the proof is wrong.
    $endgroup$
    – miracle173
    Jul 8 at 14:18







11




11




$begingroup$
"a^2 is a factor b^2 and b" You are right $a^2$ divides $b^2$, but why would it divide $b$?
$endgroup$
– Wojowu
Jul 7 at 16:06




$begingroup$
"a^2 is a factor b^2 and b" You are right $a^2$ divides $b^2$, but why would it divide $b$?
$endgroup$
– Wojowu
Jul 7 at 16:06




7




7




$begingroup$
First error I spotted is that $a^2$ need not be a factor of $b$ just because it is a factor of $b^2$. Indeed, if $a=2$ and $b=2$, then $a^2=4$ is a factor of $b^2=4$ but $a^2=4$ is not a factor of $b=2$.
$endgroup$
– Dave
Jul 7 at 16:06




$begingroup$
First error I spotted is that $a^2$ need not be a factor of $b$ just because it is a factor of $b^2$. Indeed, if $a=2$ and $b=2$, then $a^2=4$ is a factor of $b^2=4$ but $a^2=4$ is not a factor of $b=2$.
$endgroup$
– Dave
Jul 7 at 16:06




3




3




$begingroup$
Also, it is clear that integers are rational because given any integer $a$ we can write $a=fraca1$.
$endgroup$
– Dave
Jul 7 at 16:08




$begingroup$
Also, it is clear that integers are rational because given any integer $a$ we can write $a=fraca1$.
$endgroup$
– Dave
Jul 7 at 16:08




4




4




$begingroup$
If b and c are coprime, and a=b/c, then what does c have to be?
$endgroup$
– pokep
Jul 7 at 17:33




$begingroup$
If b and c are coprime, and a=b/c, then what does c have to be?
$endgroup$
– pokep
Jul 7 at 17:33




3




3




$begingroup$
@Toolazytothinkofaname It is rather simple to spot the error. Substitute the variables by actual integers and find where the proof is wrong.
$endgroup$
– miracle173
Jul 8 at 14:18




$begingroup$
@Toolazytothinkofaname It is rather simple to spot the error. Substitute the variables by actual integers and find where the proof is wrong.
$endgroup$
– miracle173
Jul 8 at 14:18










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















41












$begingroup$

The problem in the proof is that $a^2|b^2nRightarrow a^2|b$. For instance, take $a=2$ and $b=6$. Clearly, $4|36$ but $4nmid 6$.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$




















    6












    $begingroup$

    I think you are confusing that if $p$ is prime and $p$ divides $b^k$ then $p|b$. That is true if $p$ is prime.



    Actually it's also true for a composite $a|b^k$ then $a|b$ if $a$ has no square factors. But if $a$ as any prime factors to a power greater than $1$ it need not be true.



    And in fact its obviously not true as $a^2$ divides $a^2$ but $a^2$ doesn't divide $a$ (unless $a = 1$).



    Read on....



    It most certainly is not true if $a|b^k$ that $a|b$ It means that the prime factors of $a$ are prime factors of $b$. And it means that the powers of those prime factors of $a$ are at most equal to $k$ times the powers of the same prime factors of $b$ but because $k$ is larger than .....



    Oh let me put it this way.



    Suppose $a = prod p_i^m_i$ be the prime factorization of $a$. Suppose $a|b^k$. Then that means that $p_i$ are prime factors of $b$ and that $b = dprod p_i^j_i$. And it means that $b^k = d^k prod p_i^k*j_i$.



    And as $a|b^k$ that means each $m_i le k*j_i$. But that does not mean $m_i le j_i$ which would mean $a|b$.



    You statement $a|b^k$ means $a|b$ if $a$ has square free and all the prime factor powers were $1$ but not other wise.



    Simple example if $a = 12 = 2^2*3$ and $b= 90 = 2*3^2*5$. Now $a|b^2 = 8100 = 2^2*3^4*5^2$.



    This means the prime factors of $a$ ($2,3$) are also prime factors of $b$. And it means that the powers of the prime factors of $a$ ($2mapsto 2; 3mapsto 1$) are less or equal to $2$ times the powers in $b$ ($2mapsto 1$ and $2 le 2*1$ and $3mapsto 2$ and $1 le 2*2$) but it doesnt mean the are less than or equal to the powers of $b$. (In $a; 2mapsto 2$ but in $b; 2mapsto 1$ and $2 not le 1$).



    So $12 not mid 90$.



    It's certainly can't be the case that $a|b implies a^2| b^2 implies a^2|b$! That would mean every time you have $a|b$ you can just keep squaring and reducing to get $a^m|b$ for any power of $m$.



    That would mean if $3|6$ then $3^2|6$ and $3^4|6$ and $3^2048|6$ and so on.



    Or in this case as $a = b$ (and $c=1$.... because $a$ is an integer) you would have $a|a$ so $a^2|a$? And $a^4|a$. That's .... simply not true.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      No, $,pmid b^k,Rightarrow, pmid b,$ is true $iff p,$ is squarefree. Follow the link for a handful of characterizations of squarefree integers.
      $endgroup$
      – Bill Dubuque
      Jul 7 at 17:44











    • $begingroup$
      Why do you say "no"? That is exactly what I said.
      $endgroup$
      – fleablood
      Jul 7 at 17:52










    • $begingroup$
      Because the first paragraph was incorrect. Now it is correct after your edit.
      $endgroup$
      – Bill Dubuque
      Jul 7 at 17:54







    • 1




      $begingroup$
      Okay. I used "only" colloquially. My bad. I'm pretty sure the OP was confusing the FTA with Euclid's lemma. So I said that only works if $p$ is prime. Colloquially that doesn't mean $p$ being prime is required and it is false otherwise. It means you can only cite that lemma if $p$ is prime. There are many other ways $a|b^k$ and $a|b$ can both be true but citing Euclid's lemma is usually reserved for $a$ prime. But in math I shouldn't have used the loaded word "only".
      $endgroup$
      – fleablood
      Jul 7 at 18:56


















    1












    $begingroup$

    Basic facts missing $ac=b$ is a lot easier to use. $a^2$ does not need to divide $b$. A fraction sharing no common factor other than 1, between the number on top ( numerator), and the number on the bottom ( denominator), is said to be in lowest terms .



    Anyways starting from $a=bover c$ we get $ac=b$ showing c divides b, sharing no factor other than 1, and therefore, $c=1$, implying $a=b$ so $a=aover 1$ it Also can be used to show :$a=-aover -1$






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$















      Your Answer








      StackExchange.ready(function()
      var channelOptions =
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "69"
      ;
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
      createEditor();
      );

      else
      createEditor();

      );

      function createEditor()
      StackExchange.prepareEditor(
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: true,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: 10,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader:
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      ,
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      );



      );













      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function ()
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3285940%2fwhat-is-the-problem-here-all-integers-are-irrational-proof-i-think-so%23new-answer', 'question_page');

      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes








      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      41












      $begingroup$

      The problem in the proof is that $a^2|b^2nRightarrow a^2|b$. For instance, take $a=2$ and $b=6$. Clearly, $4|36$ but $4nmid 6$.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$

















        41












        $begingroup$

        The problem in the proof is that $a^2|b^2nRightarrow a^2|b$. For instance, take $a=2$ and $b=6$. Clearly, $4|36$ but $4nmid 6$.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$















          41












          41








          41





          $begingroup$

          The problem in the proof is that $a^2|b^2nRightarrow a^2|b$. For instance, take $a=2$ and $b=6$. Clearly, $4|36$ but $4nmid 6$.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          The problem in the proof is that $a^2|b^2nRightarrow a^2|b$. For instance, take $a=2$ and $b=6$. Clearly, $4|36$ but $4nmid 6$.







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered Jul 7 at 16:12









          AnandAnand

          5591 silver badge11 bronze badges




          5591 silver badge11 bronze badges























              6












              $begingroup$

              I think you are confusing that if $p$ is prime and $p$ divides $b^k$ then $p|b$. That is true if $p$ is prime.



              Actually it's also true for a composite $a|b^k$ then $a|b$ if $a$ has no square factors. But if $a$ as any prime factors to a power greater than $1$ it need not be true.



              And in fact its obviously not true as $a^2$ divides $a^2$ but $a^2$ doesn't divide $a$ (unless $a = 1$).



              Read on....



              It most certainly is not true if $a|b^k$ that $a|b$ It means that the prime factors of $a$ are prime factors of $b$. And it means that the powers of those prime factors of $a$ are at most equal to $k$ times the powers of the same prime factors of $b$ but because $k$ is larger than .....



              Oh let me put it this way.



              Suppose $a = prod p_i^m_i$ be the prime factorization of $a$. Suppose $a|b^k$. Then that means that $p_i$ are prime factors of $b$ and that $b = dprod p_i^j_i$. And it means that $b^k = d^k prod p_i^k*j_i$.



              And as $a|b^k$ that means each $m_i le k*j_i$. But that does not mean $m_i le j_i$ which would mean $a|b$.



              You statement $a|b^k$ means $a|b$ if $a$ has square free and all the prime factor powers were $1$ but not other wise.



              Simple example if $a = 12 = 2^2*3$ and $b= 90 = 2*3^2*5$. Now $a|b^2 = 8100 = 2^2*3^4*5^2$.



              This means the prime factors of $a$ ($2,3$) are also prime factors of $b$. And it means that the powers of the prime factors of $a$ ($2mapsto 2; 3mapsto 1$) are less or equal to $2$ times the powers in $b$ ($2mapsto 1$ and $2 le 2*1$ and $3mapsto 2$ and $1 le 2*2$) but it doesnt mean the are less than or equal to the powers of $b$. (In $a; 2mapsto 2$ but in $b; 2mapsto 1$ and $2 not le 1$).



              So $12 not mid 90$.



              It's certainly can't be the case that $a|b implies a^2| b^2 implies a^2|b$! That would mean every time you have $a|b$ you can just keep squaring and reducing to get $a^m|b$ for any power of $m$.



              That would mean if $3|6$ then $3^2|6$ and $3^4|6$ and $3^2048|6$ and so on.



              Or in this case as $a = b$ (and $c=1$.... because $a$ is an integer) you would have $a|a$ so $a^2|a$? And $a^4|a$. That's .... simply not true.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$












              • $begingroup$
                No, $,pmid b^k,Rightarrow, pmid b,$ is true $iff p,$ is squarefree. Follow the link for a handful of characterizations of squarefree integers.
                $endgroup$
                – Bill Dubuque
                Jul 7 at 17:44











              • $begingroup$
                Why do you say "no"? That is exactly what I said.
                $endgroup$
                – fleablood
                Jul 7 at 17:52










              • $begingroup$
                Because the first paragraph was incorrect. Now it is correct after your edit.
                $endgroup$
                – Bill Dubuque
                Jul 7 at 17:54







              • 1




                $begingroup$
                Okay. I used "only" colloquially. My bad. I'm pretty sure the OP was confusing the FTA with Euclid's lemma. So I said that only works if $p$ is prime. Colloquially that doesn't mean $p$ being prime is required and it is false otherwise. It means you can only cite that lemma if $p$ is prime. There are many other ways $a|b^k$ and $a|b$ can both be true but citing Euclid's lemma is usually reserved for $a$ prime. But in math I shouldn't have used the loaded word "only".
                $endgroup$
                – fleablood
                Jul 7 at 18:56















              6












              $begingroup$

              I think you are confusing that if $p$ is prime and $p$ divides $b^k$ then $p|b$. That is true if $p$ is prime.



              Actually it's also true for a composite $a|b^k$ then $a|b$ if $a$ has no square factors. But if $a$ as any prime factors to a power greater than $1$ it need not be true.



              And in fact its obviously not true as $a^2$ divides $a^2$ but $a^2$ doesn't divide $a$ (unless $a = 1$).



              Read on....



              It most certainly is not true if $a|b^k$ that $a|b$ It means that the prime factors of $a$ are prime factors of $b$. And it means that the powers of those prime factors of $a$ are at most equal to $k$ times the powers of the same prime factors of $b$ but because $k$ is larger than .....



              Oh let me put it this way.



              Suppose $a = prod p_i^m_i$ be the prime factorization of $a$. Suppose $a|b^k$. Then that means that $p_i$ are prime factors of $b$ and that $b = dprod p_i^j_i$. And it means that $b^k = d^k prod p_i^k*j_i$.



              And as $a|b^k$ that means each $m_i le k*j_i$. But that does not mean $m_i le j_i$ which would mean $a|b$.



              You statement $a|b^k$ means $a|b$ if $a$ has square free and all the prime factor powers were $1$ but not other wise.



              Simple example if $a = 12 = 2^2*3$ and $b= 90 = 2*3^2*5$. Now $a|b^2 = 8100 = 2^2*3^4*5^2$.



              This means the prime factors of $a$ ($2,3$) are also prime factors of $b$. And it means that the powers of the prime factors of $a$ ($2mapsto 2; 3mapsto 1$) are less or equal to $2$ times the powers in $b$ ($2mapsto 1$ and $2 le 2*1$ and $3mapsto 2$ and $1 le 2*2$) but it doesnt mean the are less than or equal to the powers of $b$. (In $a; 2mapsto 2$ but in $b; 2mapsto 1$ and $2 not le 1$).



              So $12 not mid 90$.



              It's certainly can't be the case that $a|b implies a^2| b^2 implies a^2|b$! That would mean every time you have $a|b$ you can just keep squaring and reducing to get $a^m|b$ for any power of $m$.



              That would mean if $3|6$ then $3^2|6$ and $3^4|6$ and $3^2048|6$ and so on.



              Or in this case as $a = b$ (and $c=1$.... because $a$ is an integer) you would have $a|a$ so $a^2|a$? And $a^4|a$. That's .... simply not true.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$












              • $begingroup$
                No, $,pmid b^k,Rightarrow, pmid b,$ is true $iff p,$ is squarefree. Follow the link for a handful of characterizations of squarefree integers.
                $endgroup$
                – Bill Dubuque
                Jul 7 at 17:44











              • $begingroup$
                Why do you say "no"? That is exactly what I said.
                $endgroup$
                – fleablood
                Jul 7 at 17:52










              • $begingroup$
                Because the first paragraph was incorrect. Now it is correct after your edit.
                $endgroup$
                – Bill Dubuque
                Jul 7 at 17:54







              • 1




                $begingroup$
                Okay. I used "only" colloquially. My bad. I'm pretty sure the OP was confusing the FTA with Euclid's lemma. So I said that only works if $p$ is prime. Colloquially that doesn't mean $p$ being prime is required and it is false otherwise. It means you can only cite that lemma if $p$ is prime. There are many other ways $a|b^k$ and $a|b$ can both be true but citing Euclid's lemma is usually reserved for $a$ prime. But in math I shouldn't have used the loaded word "only".
                $endgroup$
                – fleablood
                Jul 7 at 18:56













              6












              6








              6





              $begingroup$

              I think you are confusing that if $p$ is prime and $p$ divides $b^k$ then $p|b$. That is true if $p$ is prime.



              Actually it's also true for a composite $a|b^k$ then $a|b$ if $a$ has no square factors. But if $a$ as any prime factors to a power greater than $1$ it need not be true.



              And in fact its obviously not true as $a^2$ divides $a^2$ but $a^2$ doesn't divide $a$ (unless $a = 1$).



              Read on....



              It most certainly is not true if $a|b^k$ that $a|b$ It means that the prime factors of $a$ are prime factors of $b$. And it means that the powers of those prime factors of $a$ are at most equal to $k$ times the powers of the same prime factors of $b$ but because $k$ is larger than .....



              Oh let me put it this way.



              Suppose $a = prod p_i^m_i$ be the prime factorization of $a$. Suppose $a|b^k$. Then that means that $p_i$ are prime factors of $b$ and that $b = dprod p_i^j_i$. And it means that $b^k = d^k prod p_i^k*j_i$.



              And as $a|b^k$ that means each $m_i le k*j_i$. But that does not mean $m_i le j_i$ which would mean $a|b$.



              You statement $a|b^k$ means $a|b$ if $a$ has square free and all the prime factor powers were $1$ but not other wise.



              Simple example if $a = 12 = 2^2*3$ and $b= 90 = 2*3^2*5$. Now $a|b^2 = 8100 = 2^2*3^4*5^2$.



              This means the prime factors of $a$ ($2,3$) are also prime factors of $b$. And it means that the powers of the prime factors of $a$ ($2mapsto 2; 3mapsto 1$) are less or equal to $2$ times the powers in $b$ ($2mapsto 1$ and $2 le 2*1$ and $3mapsto 2$ and $1 le 2*2$) but it doesnt mean the are less than or equal to the powers of $b$. (In $a; 2mapsto 2$ but in $b; 2mapsto 1$ and $2 not le 1$).



              So $12 not mid 90$.



              It's certainly can't be the case that $a|b implies a^2| b^2 implies a^2|b$! That would mean every time you have $a|b$ you can just keep squaring and reducing to get $a^m|b$ for any power of $m$.



              That would mean if $3|6$ then $3^2|6$ and $3^4|6$ and $3^2048|6$ and so on.



              Or in this case as $a = b$ (and $c=1$.... because $a$ is an integer) you would have $a|a$ so $a^2|a$? And $a^4|a$. That's .... simply not true.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$



              I think you are confusing that if $p$ is prime and $p$ divides $b^k$ then $p|b$. That is true if $p$ is prime.



              Actually it's also true for a composite $a|b^k$ then $a|b$ if $a$ has no square factors. But if $a$ as any prime factors to a power greater than $1$ it need not be true.



              And in fact its obviously not true as $a^2$ divides $a^2$ but $a^2$ doesn't divide $a$ (unless $a = 1$).



              Read on....



              It most certainly is not true if $a|b^k$ that $a|b$ It means that the prime factors of $a$ are prime factors of $b$. And it means that the powers of those prime factors of $a$ are at most equal to $k$ times the powers of the same prime factors of $b$ but because $k$ is larger than .....



              Oh let me put it this way.



              Suppose $a = prod p_i^m_i$ be the prime factorization of $a$. Suppose $a|b^k$. Then that means that $p_i$ are prime factors of $b$ and that $b = dprod p_i^j_i$. And it means that $b^k = d^k prod p_i^k*j_i$.



              And as $a|b^k$ that means each $m_i le k*j_i$. But that does not mean $m_i le j_i$ which would mean $a|b$.



              You statement $a|b^k$ means $a|b$ if $a$ has square free and all the prime factor powers were $1$ but not other wise.



              Simple example if $a = 12 = 2^2*3$ and $b= 90 = 2*3^2*5$. Now $a|b^2 = 8100 = 2^2*3^4*5^2$.



              This means the prime factors of $a$ ($2,3$) are also prime factors of $b$. And it means that the powers of the prime factors of $a$ ($2mapsto 2; 3mapsto 1$) are less or equal to $2$ times the powers in $b$ ($2mapsto 1$ and $2 le 2*1$ and $3mapsto 2$ and $1 le 2*2$) but it doesnt mean the are less than or equal to the powers of $b$. (In $a; 2mapsto 2$ but in $b; 2mapsto 1$ and $2 not le 1$).



              So $12 not mid 90$.



              It's certainly can't be the case that $a|b implies a^2| b^2 implies a^2|b$! That would mean every time you have $a|b$ you can just keep squaring and reducing to get $a^m|b$ for any power of $m$.



              That would mean if $3|6$ then $3^2|6$ and $3^4|6$ and $3^2048|6$ and so on.



              Or in this case as $a = b$ (and $c=1$.... because $a$ is an integer) you would have $a|a$ so $a^2|a$? And $a^4|a$. That's .... simply not true.







              share|cite|improve this answer














              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer








              edited Jul 7 at 17:52

























              answered Jul 7 at 17:23









              fleabloodfleablood

              75.9k2 gold badges28 silver badges95 bronze badges




              75.9k2 gold badges28 silver badges95 bronze badges











              • $begingroup$
                No, $,pmid b^k,Rightarrow, pmid b,$ is true $iff p,$ is squarefree. Follow the link for a handful of characterizations of squarefree integers.
                $endgroup$
                – Bill Dubuque
                Jul 7 at 17:44











              • $begingroup$
                Why do you say "no"? That is exactly what I said.
                $endgroup$
                – fleablood
                Jul 7 at 17:52










              • $begingroup$
                Because the first paragraph was incorrect. Now it is correct after your edit.
                $endgroup$
                – Bill Dubuque
                Jul 7 at 17:54







              • 1




                $begingroup$
                Okay. I used "only" colloquially. My bad. I'm pretty sure the OP was confusing the FTA with Euclid's lemma. So I said that only works if $p$ is prime. Colloquially that doesn't mean $p$ being prime is required and it is false otherwise. It means you can only cite that lemma if $p$ is prime. There are many other ways $a|b^k$ and $a|b$ can both be true but citing Euclid's lemma is usually reserved for $a$ prime. But in math I shouldn't have used the loaded word "only".
                $endgroup$
                – fleablood
                Jul 7 at 18:56
















              • $begingroup$
                No, $,pmid b^k,Rightarrow, pmid b,$ is true $iff p,$ is squarefree. Follow the link for a handful of characterizations of squarefree integers.
                $endgroup$
                – Bill Dubuque
                Jul 7 at 17:44











              • $begingroup$
                Why do you say "no"? That is exactly what I said.
                $endgroup$
                – fleablood
                Jul 7 at 17:52










              • $begingroup$
                Because the first paragraph was incorrect. Now it is correct after your edit.
                $endgroup$
                – Bill Dubuque
                Jul 7 at 17:54







              • 1




                $begingroup$
                Okay. I used "only" colloquially. My bad. I'm pretty sure the OP was confusing the FTA with Euclid's lemma. So I said that only works if $p$ is prime. Colloquially that doesn't mean $p$ being prime is required and it is false otherwise. It means you can only cite that lemma if $p$ is prime. There are many other ways $a|b^k$ and $a|b$ can both be true but citing Euclid's lemma is usually reserved for $a$ prime. But in math I shouldn't have used the loaded word "only".
                $endgroup$
                – fleablood
                Jul 7 at 18:56















              $begingroup$
              No, $,pmid b^k,Rightarrow, pmid b,$ is true $iff p,$ is squarefree. Follow the link for a handful of characterizations of squarefree integers.
              $endgroup$
              – Bill Dubuque
              Jul 7 at 17:44





              $begingroup$
              No, $,pmid b^k,Rightarrow, pmid b,$ is true $iff p,$ is squarefree. Follow the link for a handful of characterizations of squarefree integers.
              $endgroup$
              – Bill Dubuque
              Jul 7 at 17:44













              $begingroup$
              Why do you say "no"? That is exactly what I said.
              $endgroup$
              – fleablood
              Jul 7 at 17:52




              $begingroup$
              Why do you say "no"? That is exactly what I said.
              $endgroup$
              – fleablood
              Jul 7 at 17:52












              $begingroup$
              Because the first paragraph was incorrect. Now it is correct after your edit.
              $endgroup$
              – Bill Dubuque
              Jul 7 at 17:54





              $begingroup$
              Because the first paragraph was incorrect. Now it is correct after your edit.
              $endgroup$
              – Bill Dubuque
              Jul 7 at 17:54





              1




              1




              $begingroup$
              Okay. I used "only" colloquially. My bad. I'm pretty sure the OP was confusing the FTA with Euclid's lemma. So I said that only works if $p$ is prime. Colloquially that doesn't mean $p$ being prime is required and it is false otherwise. It means you can only cite that lemma if $p$ is prime. There are many other ways $a|b^k$ and $a|b$ can both be true but citing Euclid's lemma is usually reserved for $a$ prime. But in math I shouldn't have used the loaded word "only".
              $endgroup$
              – fleablood
              Jul 7 at 18:56




              $begingroup$
              Okay. I used "only" colloquially. My bad. I'm pretty sure the OP was confusing the FTA with Euclid's lemma. So I said that only works if $p$ is prime. Colloquially that doesn't mean $p$ being prime is required and it is false otherwise. It means you can only cite that lemma if $p$ is prime. There are many other ways $a|b^k$ and $a|b$ can both be true but citing Euclid's lemma is usually reserved for $a$ prime. But in math I shouldn't have used the loaded word "only".
              $endgroup$
              – fleablood
              Jul 7 at 18:56











              1












              $begingroup$

              Basic facts missing $ac=b$ is a lot easier to use. $a^2$ does not need to divide $b$. A fraction sharing no common factor other than 1, between the number on top ( numerator), and the number on the bottom ( denominator), is said to be in lowest terms .



              Anyways starting from $a=bover c$ we get $ac=b$ showing c divides b, sharing no factor other than 1, and therefore, $c=1$, implying $a=b$ so $a=aover 1$ it Also can be used to show :$a=-aover -1$






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$

















                1












                $begingroup$

                Basic facts missing $ac=b$ is a lot easier to use. $a^2$ does not need to divide $b$. A fraction sharing no common factor other than 1, between the number on top ( numerator), and the number on the bottom ( denominator), is said to be in lowest terms .



                Anyways starting from $a=bover c$ we get $ac=b$ showing c divides b, sharing no factor other than 1, and therefore, $c=1$, implying $a=b$ so $a=aover 1$ it Also can be used to show :$a=-aover -1$






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$















                  1












                  1








                  1





                  $begingroup$

                  Basic facts missing $ac=b$ is a lot easier to use. $a^2$ does not need to divide $b$. A fraction sharing no common factor other than 1, between the number on top ( numerator), and the number on the bottom ( denominator), is said to be in lowest terms .



                  Anyways starting from $a=bover c$ we get $ac=b$ showing c divides b, sharing no factor other than 1, and therefore, $c=1$, implying $a=b$ so $a=aover 1$ it Also can be used to show :$a=-aover -1$






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  Basic facts missing $ac=b$ is a lot easier to use. $a^2$ does not need to divide $b$. A fraction sharing no common factor other than 1, between the number on top ( numerator), and the number on the bottom ( denominator), is said to be in lowest terms .



                  Anyways starting from $a=bover c$ we get $ac=b$ showing c divides b, sharing no factor other than 1, and therefore, $c=1$, implying $a=b$ so $a=aover 1$ it Also can be used to show :$a=-aover -1$







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Jul 8 at 0:41









                  Roddy MacPheeRoddy MacPhee

                  382 gold badges2 silver badges25 bronze badges




                  382 gold badges2 silver badges25 bronze badges



























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded
















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid


                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function ()
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3285940%2fwhat-is-the-problem-here-all-integers-are-irrational-proof-i-think-so%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Category:9 (number) SubcategoriesMedia in category "9 (number)"Navigation menuUpload mediaGND ID: 4485639-8Library of Congress authority ID: sh85091979ReasonatorScholiaStatistics

                      Circuit construction for execution of conditional statements using least significant bitHow are two different registers being used as “control”?How exactly is the stated composite state of the two registers being produced using the $R_zz$ controlled rotations?Efficiently performing controlled rotations in HHLWould this quantum algorithm implementation work?How to prepare a superposed states of odd integers from $1$ to $sqrtN$?Why is this implementation of the order finding algorithm not working?Circuit construction for Hamiltonian simulationHow can I invert the least significant bit of a certain term of a superposed state?Implementing an oracleImplementing a controlled sum operation

                      Magento 2 “No Payment Methods” in Admin New OrderHow to integrate Paypal Express Checkout with the Magento APIMagento 1.5 - Sales > Order > edit order and shipping methods disappearAuto Invoice Check/Money Order Payment methodAdd more simple payment methods?Shipping methods not showingWhat should I do to change payment methods if changing the configuration has no effects?1.9 - No Payment Methods showing upMy Payment Methods not Showing for downloadable/virtual product when checkout?Magento2 API to access internal payment methodHow to call an existing payment methods in the registration form?