Fundamental theorem of arithmetic?

Google

Did you mean | Travel | Economics | Finance | Marketing | Business | Culture | Geography | History | Life | Mathematics | Science | Society | Technology | New site added |

Add a link on the top of this Fundamental theorem of arithmetic page Express submission by secure payment !


In mathematics, and in particular number theory, the fundamental theorem of arithmetic or unique factorization theorem is the statement that every positive integer greater than 1 is either a prime number or can be written as a product of prime numbers. Furthermore this factorization is unique except for the order. For instance, we can write

6936 = 23 · 3 · 172 or 1200 = 24 · 3 · 52

and there are no other possible factorizations of 6936 or 1200 into prime numbers, if we ignore the ordering of the factors.

To make the theorem work even for the number 1, we can think of 1 as being the product of zero prime numbers (see empty product).

Have to see

Contents

Italian FriendFinder - Italian Personals
FriendFinder - Traditional Personals
Asia FriendFinder - Chinese Personals
Filipino FriendFinder - Filipino Personals
OutPersonals - Gay Sex Personals
Gay FriendFinder - Gay Dating Personals
ALT.com - Fetish AND1 BDSM Personals
Korean FriendFinder - Korean Personals
Senior FriendFinder - 40+ Personals
German FriendFinder - German Personals
BigChurch - Christian/Catholic Personals
Indian FriendFinder - Indian Personals
French FriendFinder - French Personals
Jewish FriendFinder - Jewish Personals
Amigos.com - Spanish/Portuguese Personals
Adult FriendFinder - Sex Personals

Applications

The theorem establishes the importance of prime numbers. The prime numbers are the basic building blocks of the positive integers, in the sense that every positive integer can be constructed from primes, and there is essentially only one such construction.

Knowing the prime number factorization of a number gives complete knowledge about all (prime and non-prime) divisors of that number. For instance, the above factorization of 6936 tells us that the positive divisors of 6936 are of the form

2a · 3b · 17c

with 0 ≤ a ≤ 3, 0 ≤ b ≤ 1, and 0 ≤ c ≤ 2. This yields a total of 4 · 2 · 3 = 24 positive divisors.

Once the prime factorizations of two numbers are known, their greatest common divisor and least common multiple can be found quickly. For instance, from the above we see that the greatest common divisor of 6936 and 1200 is 23 · 3 = 24. However if the prime factorizations are not known, the use of Euclid's algorithm generally requires much less calculation than factoring the two numbers.

The fundamental theorem ensures that additive and multiplicative arithmetic functions are completely determined by their values on the powers of prime numbers.

Proof

The theorem was essentially first proved by Euclid. Although at first sight it seems 'obvious', it does not hold in more general number systems, including many rings of algebraic integers. This was first pointed out by Ernst Kummer in 1843, in his work on Fermat's last theorem. The recognition of this failure is one of the earliest developments in algebraic number theory.

The proof consists of two parts: first, we have to show that every number can indeed be written as a product of primes; then we have to show that any two such representations are essentially the same.

Suppose there were a positive integer which cannot be written as a product of primes. Then there must be a smallest such number: let's call it n. This number n cannot be 1, because of our convention above. It cannot be a prime number either, since any prime number is a product of a single prime, itself. So it must be a composite number. Thus

n = ab

where both a and b are positive integers smaller than n. Since n was the smallest number for which the theorem fails, both a and b can be written as products of primes. But then

n = ab

can be written as a product of primes as well, a contradiction. This is a minimal counterexample argument.

The uniqueness part of the proof hinges on the following fact: if a prime number p divides a product ab, then it divides a or it divides b (Euclid's lemma). This is a lemma, to prove first. For that, if p doesn't divide a, then p and a are coprime and Bézout's identity yields integers x and y such that

px + ay = 1.

Multiplying with b yields

pbx + aby = b,

and since both summands on the left-hand side are divisible by p, the right-hand side is also divisible by p. That proves the lemma.

Now take two products of primes which are equal. Take any prime p from the first product. It divides the first product, and hence also the second. By the above fact, p must then divide at least one factor in the second product. But the factors are all primes themselves, so p must actually be equal to one of the factors of the second product. So we can cancel p from both products. Continuing in this fashion, we eventually see that the prime factors of the two products must match up precisely.

Aliter:

Another proof of the uniqueness of the prime factorization of a given integer uses infinite descent: Assume that a certain integer can be written as (at least) two different products of prime numbers, then there must exist a smallest integer s with such a property. Call the two products of s p1 w/. pm and q1 w/. qn. No pi (with 1 ≤ im) can be equal to any qj (with 1 ≤ jn), as there would otherwise be a smaller integer factorizable in two ways (by removing prime factors common in both products) violating our assumption. We can now assume without loss of generality that p1 is a prime factor smaller than any qj (with 1 ≤ jn). Take q1. Then there exist integers d and r such that

q1/p1 = d + r/p1

and 0 AND1lt; r AND1lt; p1 AND1lt; q1 (r can't be 0, as that would make q1 a multiple of p1 and not prime). We now get

p2 w/. pm = (d + r/p1) q2 w/. qn = dq2 w/. qn + rq2 w/. qn/p1.

The second term in the last expression must be equal to an integer we call k, i.e.

k = rq2 w/. qn/p1.

This gives us

p1k = rq2 w/. qn.

The value of both sides of this equation is obviously smaller than s, but is still large enough to be factorizable. Since r is smaller than p1, the two prime factorizations we get on each side after both k and r are written out as their product of primes must be different. This is in contradiction with s being the smallest integer factorizable in more than one way. Thus the original assumption must be false.

See also

References

  • Baker, Alan (1984). A Concise Introduction to the Theory of Numbers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521286549

External links

What does Fundamental theorem of arithmetic mean ? Search with Google !

Google

Article on Fundamental theorem of arithmetic, category, different spelling or sense



Did you mean: Culture | Geography | History | Life | Mathematics | Science | Society | Technology
Economy finance business money economy: Economics | Finance | Marketing | Business | Money | Real Estate | Insurance | Retirement | Microeconomics | Economics

Top Search: Kazaa | Sex | Pornography | Games | MySpace | Google | Ebay | Paris Hilton | Carmen Electra | Jessica Simpson | Eminem | MapQuest | Dogs | Jokes | Obituaries | MSN Messenger | Splogs | Ringtones | Casino | Poker | Gambling | Lyrics | Anime |

Continents and countries in the world: Japan | United Kingdom | Canada | France | Amsterdam | Monaco | Spain | Capitals Cities | Continents | World | Americas | North America | South America | Europe | Africa | Eurasia | Oceania | Antarctica | Asia | Australia


A web travel guide for your holidays, hotel and plane tickets: Travel guide and holidays
French Version, guide de voyage dans le monde: Voyage et vacances
Visit partners of Did you mean Travel: Partners
Site Map articles begining from 0 to 9 and A to Z: Site Map 0 to A | Site Map B to C | Site Map D to Z

Cours d'anglais, cours de langues pour debutant: Cours d'anglais
Annuaire france regions et tourisme: Annuaire OuiX
Sexe sur AbSexe, videos porno et annuaire sexe: Ab Sexe

Url Rewriting by Atuvu Referencement

This work is licensed under a GNU Free Documentation License.
Texts derived from WikiPedia Fundamental theorem of arithmetic
©2006 Did you mean Copyright Notice

Page Fundamental theorem of arithmetic cached on Friday 05th of September 2008 05:15:39 AM