There is a similar question however that question asks why 3|p2. Here the question is about 3|p2→3|p.
It is a simple exercise (1.2.1) from Abbot's "Understanding Analysis".
∄p,q∈N:(pq)2=3
p and q have no common factors, otherwise they would cancel each other out.
Contradiction:
p2=3q2
The troublesome part for me is
From this, we can see that p2 is a multiple of 3 and hence p must
also be a multiple of 3.
Why is that?
The proof goes on with
p=3r
q2=3r2→q=3λ.
It concluses now that q and p have common factors, which invalidates the original statement.
How can I prove p2=3q2→p=3r? If this is not true, then I don't see how the contradiction proves the statement, since it only invalidates it for such p,q that have common factors.
What if p2=3q2 and p≠3r?
Answer
If p2=3m for some m∈Z, then p=3k for some k∈Z. Suppose otherwise. By Division Algorithm, p=3k+1 or p=3k+2. Squaring p, we get either 9k2+6k+1 or 9k2+12k+4 which are both not multiples of 3, contradicting the assumption. Thus, p has to be a multiple of 3.
No comments:
Post a Comment