gcd(2a+1, 9a+4) = 1












1












$begingroup$


The question is from Burton's Elementary Number Theory. I want to know if my proof is legible.
Proof : Let $$d=gcd(2a+1, 9a+4)$$
Then $$d|2a+1$$ and $$d|9a+4$$
$$2a+1=db$$ and $$9a+4=dc$$
$$ a = frac{db-1}{2}$$and$$a= frac{dc-4}{9}$$
Equating both equations :
$$ 9db-9=2dc-8 $$
$$ d(9b-2c) = 1 $$
$$ 9b-2c = frac{1}{d}$$
Now, since b and c are integers, therefore $frac{1}{d}$ is an integer, i.e d divides 1 and therefore $$gcd(a, b)= d = 1$$.






proof-verification







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    It's correct. Essentially you eliminated $,a,,$ which can be done more directly as follows: $$bmod d!:, 2a!+!1equiv 0equiv 9a!+!4 Rightarrow color{#c00}0equiv 9(2a!+!1)-2(9a!+!4)equivcolor{#c00} 1 Rightarrow dmid color{#c00}{1!-!0}qquad$$
    $endgroup$
    – Bill Dubuque
    Jan 4 at 17:02












  • $begingroup$
    @BillDubuque Thanks. I'm sure it's a more direct approach but I'm unfamiliar with modular arithmetic so it had to be something without it.
    $endgroup$
    – P.Jo
    Jan 4 at 17:22










  • $begingroup$
    We can eliminate congruence notation too! Namely the above means $$dmid 2a!+!1,9a!+!4 Rightarrow dmid 1!=! 9(2a!+!1)-2(9a!+!4)qquad $$ since multiples of $d$ are closed under integral linear combinations.
    $endgroup$
    – Bill Dubuque
    Jan 4 at 17:27










  • $begingroup$
    @BillDubuque Yeah. That makes perfect sense. But what does it mean to be 'closed under integral linear combinations'?
    $endgroup$
    – P.Jo
    Jan 5 at 4:19










  • $begingroup$
    @BillDubuque Does it mean that the multiples of d= gcd(a, b) are all the linear combinations of a and b?
    $endgroup$
    – P.Jo
    Jan 5 at 4:27
















1












$begingroup$


The question is from Burton's Elementary Number Theory. I want to know if my proof is legible.
Proof : Let $$d=gcd(2a+1, 9a+4)$$
Then $$d|2a+1$$ and $$d|9a+4$$
$$2a+1=db$$ and $$9a+4=dc$$
$$ a = frac{db-1}{2}$$and$$a= frac{dc-4}{9}$$
Equating both equations :
$$ 9db-9=2dc-8 $$
$$ d(9b-2c) = 1 $$
$$ 9b-2c = frac{1}{d}$$
Now, since b and c are integers, therefore $frac{1}{d}$ is an integer, i.e d divides 1 and therefore $$gcd(a, b)= d = 1$$.






proof-verification







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    It's correct. Essentially you eliminated $,a,,$ which can be done more directly as follows: $$bmod d!:, 2a!+!1equiv 0equiv 9a!+!4 Rightarrow color{#c00}0equiv 9(2a!+!1)-2(9a!+!4)equivcolor{#c00} 1 Rightarrow dmid color{#c00}{1!-!0}qquad$$
    $endgroup$
    – Bill Dubuque
    Jan 4 at 17:02












  • $begingroup$
    @BillDubuque Thanks. I'm sure it's a more direct approach but I'm unfamiliar with modular arithmetic so it had to be something without it.
    $endgroup$
    – P.Jo
    Jan 4 at 17:22










  • $begingroup$
    We can eliminate congruence notation too! Namely the above means $$dmid 2a!+!1,9a!+!4 Rightarrow dmid 1!=! 9(2a!+!1)-2(9a!+!4)qquad $$ since multiples of $d$ are closed under integral linear combinations.
    $endgroup$
    – Bill Dubuque
    Jan 4 at 17:27










  • $begingroup$
    @BillDubuque Yeah. That makes perfect sense. But what does it mean to be 'closed under integral linear combinations'?
    $endgroup$
    – P.Jo
    Jan 5 at 4:19










  • $begingroup$
    @BillDubuque Does it mean that the multiples of d= gcd(a, b) are all the linear combinations of a and b?
    $endgroup$
    – P.Jo
    Jan 5 at 4:27














1












1








1





$begingroup$


The question is from Burton's Elementary Number Theory. I want to know if my proof is legible.
Proof : Let $$d=gcd(2a+1, 9a+4)$$
Then $$d|2a+1$$ and $$d|9a+4$$
$$2a+1=db$$ and $$9a+4=dc$$
$$ a = frac{db-1}{2}$$and$$a= frac{dc-4}{9}$$
Equating both equations :
$$ 9db-9=2dc-8 $$
$$ d(9b-2c) = 1 $$
$$ 9b-2c = frac{1}{d}$$
Now, since b and c are integers, therefore $frac{1}{d}$ is an integer, i.e d divides 1 and therefore $$gcd(a, b)= d = 1$$.






proof-verification







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




The question is from Burton's Elementary Number Theory. I want to know if my proof is legible.
Proof : Let $$d=gcd(2a+1, 9a+4)$$
Then $$d|2a+1$$ and $$d|9a+4$$
$$2a+1=db$$ and $$9a+4=dc$$
$$ a = frac{db-1}{2}$$and$$a= frac{dc-4}{9}$$
Equating both equations :
$$ 9db-9=2dc-8 $$
$$ d(9b-2c) = 1 $$
$$ 9b-2c = frac{1}{d}$$
Now, since b and c are integers, therefore $frac{1}{d}$ is an integer, i.e d divides 1 and therefore $$gcd(a, b)= d = 1$$.






proof-verification




proof-verification






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Jan 4 at 15:31









P.JoP.Jo

85




85












  • $begingroup$
    It's correct. Essentially you eliminated $,a,,$ which can be done more directly as follows: $$bmod d!:, 2a!+!1equiv 0equiv 9a!+!4 Rightarrow color{#c00}0equiv 9(2a!+!1)-2(9a!+!4)equivcolor{#c00} 1 Rightarrow dmid color{#c00}{1!-!0}qquad$$
    $endgroup$
    – Bill Dubuque
    Jan 4 at 17:02












  • $begingroup$
    @BillDubuque Thanks. I'm sure it's a more direct approach but I'm unfamiliar with modular arithmetic so it had to be something without it.
    $endgroup$
    – P.Jo
    Jan 4 at 17:22










  • $begingroup$
    We can eliminate congruence notation too! Namely the above means $$dmid 2a!+!1,9a!+!4 Rightarrow dmid 1!=! 9(2a!+!1)-2(9a!+!4)qquad $$ since multiples of $d$ are closed under integral linear combinations.
    $endgroup$
    – Bill Dubuque
    Jan 4 at 17:27










  • $begingroup$
    @BillDubuque Yeah. That makes perfect sense. But what does it mean to be 'closed under integral linear combinations'?
    $endgroup$
    – P.Jo
    Jan 5 at 4:19










  • $begingroup$
    @BillDubuque Does it mean that the multiples of d= gcd(a, b) are all the linear combinations of a and b?
    $endgroup$
    – P.Jo
    Jan 5 at 4:27


















  • $begingroup$
    It's correct. Essentially you eliminated $,a,,$ which can be done more directly as follows: $$bmod d!:, 2a!+!1equiv 0equiv 9a!+!4 Rightarrow color{#c00}0equiv 9(2a!+!1)-2(9a!+!4)equivcolor{#c00} 1 Rightarrow dmid color{#c00}{1!-!0}qquad$$
    $endgroup$
    – Bill Dubuque
    Jan 4 at 17:02












  • $begingroup$
    @BillDubuque Thanks. I'm sure it's a more direct approach but I'm unfamiliar with modular arithmetic so it had to be something without it.
    $endgroup$
    – P.Jo
    Jan 4 at 17:22










  • $begingroup$
    We can eliminate congruence notation too! Namely the above means $$dmid 2a!+!1,9a!+!4 Rightarrow dmid 1!=! 9(2a!+!1)-2(9a!+!4)qquad $$ since multiples of $d$ are closed under integral linear combinations.
    $endgroup$
    – Bill Dubuque
    Jan 4 at 17:27










  • $begingroup$
    @BillDubuque Yeah. That makes perfect sense. But what does it mean to be 'closed under integral linear combinations'?
    $endgroup$
    – P.Jo
    Jan 5 at 4:19










  • $begingroup$
    @BillDubuque Does it mean that the multiples of d= gcd(a, b) are all the linear combinations of a and b?
    $endgroup$
    – P.Jo
    Jan 5 at 4:27
















$begingroup$
It's correct. Essentially you eliminated $,a,,$ which can be done more directly as follows: $$bmod d!:, 2a!+!1equiv 0equiv 9a!+!4 Rightarrow color{#c00}0equiv 9(2a!+!1)-2(9a!+!4)equivcolor{#c00} 1 Rightarrow dmid color{#c00}{1!-!0}qquad$$
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Jan 4 at 17:02






$begingroup$
It's correct. Essentially you eliminated $,a,,$ which can be done more directly as follows: $$bmod d!:, 2a!+!1equiv 0equiv 9a!+!4 Rightarrow color{#c00}0equiv 9(2a!+!1)-2(9a!+!4)equivcolor{#c00} 1 Rightarrow dmid color{#c00}{1!-!0}qquad$$
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Jan 4 at 17:02














$begingroup$
@BillDubuque Thanks. I'm sure it's a more direct approach but I'm unfamiliar with modular arithmetic so it had to be something without it.
$endgroup$
– P.Jo
Jan 4 at 17:22




$begingroup$
@BillDubuque Thanks. I'm sure it's a more direct approach but I'm unfamiliar with modular arithmetic so it had to be something without it.
$endgroup$
– P.Jo
Jan 4 at 17:22












$begingroup$
We can eliminate congruence notation too! Namely the above means $$dmid 2a!+!1,9a!+!4 Rightarrow dmid 1!=! 9(2a!+!1)-2(9a!+!4)qquad $$ since multiples of $d$ are closed under integral linear combinations.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Jan 4 at 17:27




$begingroup$
We can eliminate congruence notation too! Namely the above means $$dmid 2a!+!1,9a!+!4 Rightarrow dmid 1!=! 9(2a!+!1)-2(9a!+!4)qquad $$ since multiples of $d$ are closed under integral linear combinations.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Jan 4 at 17:27












$begingroup$
@BillDubuque Yeah. That makes perfect sense. But what does it mean to be 'closed under integral linear combinations'?
$endgroup$
– P.Jo
Jan 5 at 4:19




$begingroup$
@BillDubuque Yeah. That makes perfect sense. But what does it mean to be 'closed under integral linear combinations'?
$endgroup$
– P.Jo
Jan 5 at 4:19












$begingroup$
@BillDubuque Does it mean that the multiples of d= gcd(a, b) are all the linear combinations of a and b?
$endgroup$
– P.Jo
Jan 5 at 4:27




$begingroup$
@BillDubuque Does it mean that the multiples of d= gcd(a, b) are all the linear combinations of a and b?
$endgroup$
– P.Jo
Jan 5 at 4:27










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















0












$begingroup$

Seems fine.



Alternatively,



$$9a+4=4(2a+1)+a$$



$$2a+1=2(a)+1$$



Hence,



$$1=(2a+1)-2a=(2a+1)-2(9a+4)+8=9(2a+1)-2(9a+4)$$



That is the greatest common divisor of $2a+1$ and $9a+4$ must divide $1$. Hence the greatest common divisor is $1$.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    What did you do here really?
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Munta
    Jan 6 at 10:57










  • $begingroup$
    I am using Euclidean algorithm to express the gcd as a combination of the two numbers.
    $endgroup$
    – Siong Thye Goh
    Jan 6 at 11:08










  • $begingroup$
    Can you please explain how this happens? I know how it works with integers, but not with expressions like these.
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Munta
    Jan 6 at 11:16










  • $begingroup$
    For the first part, I divide $9a+4$ by $2a+1$ and find that the remainder to be $a$. After which , I divide $2a+1$ by $a$ and obtain a remainder of $1$, then I work backward to substitute $a$ in terms of $9a+4$ and $2a+1$.
    $endgroup$
    – Siong Thye Goh
    Jan 6 at 11:21










  • $begingroup$
    This is the extended algorithm?
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Munta
    Jan 6 at 12:36



















1












$begingroup$

Looks good to me. Some nit picks follow:



A bit of formatting may help readability. For much of your answer you have pairs of equations which belong together, but the pairs which belong together aren't the pairs which appear close to one another.



After "therefore $frac{1}{d}$ is an integer", you can just say "so $d=1$ and we're done". Remember that $d=1$ is the very thing we want to prove, so it's unnecessary to continue with more calculations once you've reached that conclusion.



And personally I would probably have used the Euclidean algorithm instead.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    The formatting is sloppy indeed. Thanks for the 'nitpicks'. I seem to lack the knowledge of the Euclidean Algorithm since it is the next topic in the book.
    $endgroup$
    – P.Jo
    Jan 4 at 16:21










  • $begingroup$
    @P.Jo Then it's no wonder you didn't use it. The Euclidean algorithm is basically a way of simplifying the two expressions without changing their $gcd$. If you can simplify until one of them becomes $1$ or $0$ (which always happens if you only have integers, but not necessarily if you have expressions like yours), then you're done. If not, then at least it will be simplified and easier to use alternate methods like yours.
    $endgroup$
    – Arthur
    Jan 4 at 16:30










  • $begingroup$
    Nice preview before starting. Sounds like it's gonna make this easier.
    $endgroup$
    – P.Jo
    Jan 4 at 17:11



















1












$begingroup$

Divide $2a+1$ into $9a+4$ giving $9a+4 = 9/2cdot (2a+1) - 1/2$ or $2(9a+4) = 9(2a+1)-1$, or $1= -2(9a+4) + 9(2a+1)$. So each divisor of $9a+4$ and $2a+1$ divides $1$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    You are dividing $2a+1$ into $9a+4$, not the other way around as you have typed.
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Munta
    Jan 7 at 18:27










  • $begingroup$
    Indeed, you're right. Thanks.
    $endgroup$
    – Wuestenfux
    Jan 8 at 8:37



















0












$begingroup$

As Siong Thye Goh said, we can use the Euclidean algorithm to guide us to a proof. The Euclidean algorithm is based on the fact that $gcd(x,y)=gcd(x,y-tx)$. If we take $x=2a+1$, $y=9a+4$, and $t=4$, then we get $gcd(2a+1,9a+4)=gcd(2a+1,a)$. Applying it again with $x=a$, $y=2a+1$, $t=2$, we get $gcd(2a+1,a)=gcd(1,a)$. From there, it's easy to see that the gcd is $1$.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$














    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    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%2f3061760%2fgcd2a1-9a4-1%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes








    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    0












    $begingroup$

    Seems fine.



    Alternatively,



    $$9a+4=4(2a+1)+a$$



    $$2a+1=2(a)+1$$



    Hence,



    $$1=(2a+1)-2a=(2a+1)-2(9a+4)+8=9(2a+1)-2(9a+4)$$



    That is the greatest common divisor of $2a+1$ and $9a+4$ must divide $1$. Hence the greatest common divisor is $1$.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      What did you do here really?
      $endgroup$
      – Michael Munta
      Jan 6 at 10:57










    • $begingroup$
      I am using Euclidean algorithm to express the gcd as a combination of the two numbers.
      $endgroup$
      – Siong Thye Goh
      Jan 6 at 11:08










    • $begingroup$
      Can you please explain how this happens? I know how it works with integers, but not with expressions like these.
      $endgroup$
      – Michael Munta
      Jan 6 at 11:16










    • $begingroup$
      For the first part, I divide $9a+4$ by $2a+1$ and find that the remainder to be $a$. After which , I divide $2a+1$ by $a$ and obtain a remainder of $1$, then I work backward to substitute $a$ in terms of $9a+4$ and $2a+1$.
      $endgroup$
      – Siong Thye Goh
      Jan 6 at 11:21










    • $begingroup$
      This is the extended algorithm?
      $endgroup$
      – Michael Munta
      Jan 6 at 12:36
















    0












    $begingroup$

    Seems fine.



    Alternatively,



    $$9a+4=4(2a+1)+a$$



    $$2a+1=2(a)+1$$



    Hence,



    $$1=(2a+1)-2a=(2a+1)-2(9a+4)+8=9(2a+1)-2(9a+4)$$



    That is the greatest common divisor of $2a+1$ and $9a+4$ must divide $1$. Hence the greatest common divisor is $1$.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      What did you do here really?
      $endgroup$
      – Michael Munta
      Jan 6 at 10:57










    • $begingroup$
      I am using Euclidean algorithm to express the gcd as a combination of the two numbers.
      $endgroup$
      – Siong Thye Goh
      Jan 6 at 11:08










    • $begingroup$
      Can you please explain how this happens? I know how it works with integers, but not with expressions like these.
      $endgroup$
      – Michael Munta
      Jan 6 at 11:16










    • $begingroup$
      For the first part, I divide $9a+4$ by $2a+1$ and find that the remainder to be $a$. After which , I divide $2a+1$ by $a$ and obtain a remainder of $1$, then I work backward to substitute $a$ in terms of $9a+4$ and $2a+1$.
      $endgroup$
      – Siong Thye Goh
      Jan 6 at 11:21










    • $begingroup$
      This is the extended algorithm?
      $endgroup$
      – Michael Munta
      Jan 6 at 12:36














    0












    0








    0





    $begingroup$

    Seems fine.



    Alternatively,



    $$9a+4=4(2a+1)+a$$



    $$2a+1=2(a)+1$$



    Hence,



    $$1=(2a+1)-2a=(2a+1)-2(9a+4)+8=9(2a+1)-2(9a+4)$$



    That is the greatest common divisor of $2a+1$ and $9a+4$ must divide $1$. Hence the greatest common divisor is $1$.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    Seems fine.



    Alternatively,



    $$9a+4=4(2a+1)+a$$



    $$2a+1=2(a)+1$$



    Hence,



    $$1=(2a+1)-2a=(2a+1)-2(9a+4)+8=9(2a+1)-2(9a+4)$$



    That is the greatest common divisor of $2a+1$ and $9a+4$ must divide $1$. Hence the greatest common divisor is $1$.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    answered Jan 4 at 15:42









    Siong Thye GohSiong Thye Goh

    103k1468120




    103k1468120












    • $begingroup$
      What did you do here really?
      $endgroup$
      – Michael Munta
      Jan 6 at 10:57










    • $begingroup$
      I am using Euclidean algorithm to express the gcd as a combination of the two numbers.
      $endgroup$
      – Siong Thye Goh
      Jan 6 at 11:08










    • $begingroup$
      Can you please explain how this happens? I know how it works with integers, but not with expressions like these.
      $endgroup$
      – Michael Munta
      Jan 6 at 11:16










    • $begingroup$
      For the first part, I divide $9a+4$ by $2a+1$ and find that the remainder to be $a$. After which , I divide $2a+1$ by $a$ and obtain a remainder of $1$, then I work backward to substitute $a$ in terms of $9a+4$ and $2a+1$.
      $endgroup$
      – Siong Thye Goh
      Jan 6 at 11:21










    • $begingroup$
      This is the extended algorithm?
      $endgroup$
      – Michael Munta
      Jan 6 at 12:36


















    • $begingroup$
      What did you do here really?
      $endgroup$
      – Michael Munta
      Jan 6 at 10:57










    • $begingroup$
      I am using Euclidean algorithm to express the gcd as a combination of the two numbers.
      $endgroup$
      – Siong Thye Goh
      Jan 6 at 11:08










    • $begingroup$
      Can you please explain how this happens? I know how it works with integers, but not with expressions like these.
      $endgroup$
      – Michael Munta
      Jan 6 at 11:16










    • $begingroup$
      For the first part, I divide $9a+4$ by $2a+1$ and find that the remainder to be $a$. After which , I divide $2a+1$ by $a$ and obtain a remainder of $1$, then I work backward to substitute $a$ in terms of $9a+4$ and $2a+1$.
      $endgroup$
      – Siong Thye Goh
      Jan 6 at 11:21










    • $begingroup$
      This is the extended algorithm?
      $endgroup$
      – Michael Munta
      Jan 6 at 12:36
















    $begingroup$
    What did you do here really?
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Munta
    Jan 6 at 10:57




    $begingroup$
    What did you do here really?
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Munta
    Jan 6 at 10:57












    $begingroup$
    I am using Euclidean algorithm to express the gcd as a combination of the two numbers.
    $endgroup$
    – Siong Thye Goh
    Jan 6 at 11:08




    $begingroup$
    I am using Euclidean algorithm to express the gcd as a combination of the two numbers.
    $endgroup$
    – Siong Thye Goh
    Jan 6 at 11:08












    $begingroup$
    Can you please explain how this happens? I know how it works with integers, but not with expressions like these.
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Munta
    Jan 6 at 11:16




    $begingroup$
    Can you please explain how this happens? I know how it works with integers, but not with expressions like these.
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Munta
    Jan 6 at 11:16












    $begingroup$
    For the first part, I divide $9a+4$ by $2a+1$ and find that the remainder to be $a$. After which , I divide $2a+1$ by $a$ and obtain a remainder of $1$, then I work backward to substitute $a$ in terms of $9a+4$ and $2a+1$.
    $endgroup$
    – Siong Thye Goh
    Jan 6 at 11:21




    $begingroup$
    For the first part, I divide $9a+4$ by $2a+1$ and find that the remainder to be $a$. After which , I divide $2a+1$ by $a$ and obtain a remainder of $1$, then I work backward to substitute $a$ in terms of $9a+4$ and $2a+1$.
    $endgroup$
    – Siong Thye Goh
    Jan 6 at 11:21












    $begingroup$
    This is the extended algorithm?
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Munta
    Jan 6 at 12:36




    $begingroup$
    This is the extended algorithm?
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Munta
    Jan 6 at 12:36











    1












    $begingroup$

    Looks good to me. Some nit picks follow:



    A bit of formatting may help readability. For much of your answer you have pairs of equations which belong together, but the pairs which belong together aren't the pairs which appear close to one another.



    After "therefore $frac{1}{d}$ is an integer", you can just say "so $d=1$ and we're done". Remember that $d=1$ is the very thing we want to prove, so it's unnecessary to continue with more calculations once you've reached that conclusion.



    And personally I would probably have used the Euclidean algorithm instead.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      The formatting is sloppy indeed. Thanks for the 'nitpicks'. I seem to lack the knowledge of the Euclidean Algorithm since it is the next topic in the book.
      $endgroup$
      – P.Jo
      Jan 4 at 16:21










    • $begingroup$
      @P.Jo Then it's no wonder you didn't use it. The Euclidean algorithm is basically a way of simplifying the two expressions without changing their $gcd$. If you can simplify until one of them becomes $1$ or $0$ (which always happens if you only have integers, but not necessarily if you have expressions like yours), then you're done. If not, then at least it will be simplified and easier to use alternate methods like yours.
      $endgroup$
      – Arthur
      Jan 4 at 16:30










    • $begingroup$
      Nice preview before starting. Sounds like it's gonna make this easier.
      $endgroup$
      – P.Jo
      Jan 4 at 17:11
















    1












    $begingroup$

    Looks good to me. Some nit picks follow:



    A bit of formatting may help readability. For much of your answer you have pairs of equations which belong together, but the pairs which belong together aren't the pairs which appear close to one another.



    After "therefore $frac{1}{d}$ is an integer", you can just say "so $d=1$ and we're done". Remember that $d=1$ is the very thing we want to prove, so it's unnecessary to continue with more calculations once you've reached that conclusion.



    And personally I would probably have used the Euclidean algorithm instead.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      The formatting is sloppy indeed. Thanks for the 'nitpicks'. I seem to lack the knowledge of the Euclidean Algorithm since it is the next topic in the book.
      $endgroup$
      – P.Jo
      Jan 4 at 16:21










    • $begingroup$
      @P.Jo Then it's no wonder you didn't use it. The Euclidean algorithm is basically a way of simplifying the two expressions without changing their $gcd$. If you can simplify until one of them becomes $1$ or $0$ (which always happens if you only have integers, but not necessarily if you have expressions like yours), then you're done. If not, then at least it will be simplified and easier to use alternate methods like yours.
      $endgroup$
      – Arthur
      Jan 4 at 16:30










    • $begingroup$
      Nice preview before starting. Sounds like it's gonna make this easier.
      $endgroup$
      – P.Jo
      Jan 4 at 17:11














    1












    1








    1





    $begingroup$

    Looks good to me. Some nit picks follow:



    A bit of formatting may help readability. For much of your answer you have pairs of equations which belong together, but the pairs which belong together aren't the pairs which appear close to one another.



    After "therefore $frac{1}{d}$ is an integer", you can just say "so $d=1$ and we're done". Remember that $d=1$ is the very thing we want to prove, so it's unnecessary to continue with more calculations once you've reached that conclusion.



    And personally I would probably have used the Euclidean algorithm instead.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    Looks good to me. Some nit picks follow:



    A bit of formatting may help readability. For much of your answer you have pairs of equations which belong together, but the pairs which belong together aren't the pairs which appear close to one another.



    After "therefore $frac{1}{d}$ is an integer", you can just say "so $d=1$ and we're done". Remember that $d=1$ is the very thing we want to prove, so it's unnecessary to continue with more calculations once you've reached that conclusion.



    And personally I would probably have used the Euclidean algorithm instead.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    answered Jan 4 at 15:39









    ArthurArthur

    122k7122210




    122k7122210












    • $begingroup$
      The formatting is sloppy indeed. Thanks for the 'nitpicks'. I seem to lack the knowledge of the Euclidean Algorithm since it is the next topic in the book.
      $endgroup$
      – P.Jo
      Jan 4 at 16:21










    • $begingroup$
      @P.Jo Then it's no wonder you didn't use it. The Euclidean algorithm is basically a way of simplifying the two expressions without changing their $gcd$. If you can simplify until one of them becomes $1$ or $0$ (which always happens if you only have integers, but not necessarily if you have expressions like yours), then you're done. If not, then at least it will be simplified and easier to use alternate methods like yours.
      $endgroup$
      – Arthur
      Jan 4 at 16:30










    • $begingroup$
      Nice preview before starting. Sounds like it's gonna make this easier.
      $endgroup$
      – P.Jo
      Jan 4 at 17:11


















    • $begingroup$
      The formatting is sloppy indeed. Thanks for the 'nitpicks'. I seem to lack the knowledge of the Euclidean Algorithm since it is the next topic in the book.
      $endgroup$
      – P.Jo
      Jan 4 at 16:21










    • $begingroup$
      @P.Jo Then it's no wonder you didn't use it. The Euclidean algorithm is basically a way of simplifying the two expressions without changing their $gcd$. If you can simplify until one of them becomes $1$ or $0$ (which always happens if you only have integers, but not necessarily if you have expressions like yours), then you're done. If not, then at least it will be simplified and easier to use alternate methods like yours.
      $endgroup$
      – Arthur
      Jan 4 at 16:30










    • $begingroup$
      Nice preview before starting. Sounds like it's gonna make this easier.
      $endgroup$
      – P.Jo
      Jan 4 at 17:11
















    $begingroup$
    The formatting is sloppy indeed. Thanks for the 'nitpicks'. I seem to lack the knowledge of the Euclidean Algorithm since it is the next topic in the book.
    $endgroup$
    – P.Jo
    Jan 4 at 16:21




    $begingroup$
    The formatting is sloppy indeed. Thanks for the 'nitpicks'. I seem to lack the knowledge of the Euclidean Algorithm since it is the next topic in the book.
    $endgroup$
    – P.Jo
    Jan 4 at 16:21












    $begingroup$
    @P.Jo Then it's no wonder you didn't use it. The Euclidean algorithm is basically a way of simplifying the two expressions without changing their $gcd$. If you can simplify until one of them becomes $1$ or $0$ (which always happens if you only have integers, but not necessarily if you have expressions like yours), then you're done. If not, then at least it will be simplified and easier to use alternate methods like yours.
    $endgroup$
    – Arthur
    Jan 4 at 16:30




    $begingroup$
    @P.Jo Then it's no wonder you didn't use it. The Euclidean algorithm is basically a way of simplifying the two expressions without changing their $gcd$. If you can simplify until one of them becomes $1$ or $0$ (which always happens if you only have integers, but not necessarily if you have expressions like yours), then you're done. If not, then at least it will be simplified and easier to use alternate methods like yours.
    $endgroup$
    – Arthur
    Jan 4 at 16:30












    $begingroup$
    Nice preview before starting. Sounds like it's gonna make this easier.
    $endgroup$
    – P.Jo
    Jan 4 at 17:11




    $begingroup$
    Nice preview before starting. Sounds like it's gonna make this easier.
    $endgroup$
    – P.Jo
    Jan 4 at 17:11











    1












    $begingroup$

    Divide $2a+1$ into $9a+4$ giving $9a+4 = 9/2cdot (2a+1) - 1/2$ or $2(9a+4) = 9(2a+1)-1$, or $1= -2(9a+4) + 9(2a+1)$. So each divisor of $9a+4$ and $2a+1$ divides $1$.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      You are dividing $2a+1$ into $9a+4$, not the other way around as you have typed.
      $endgroup$
      – Michael Munta
      Jan 7 at 18:27










    • $begingroup$
      Indeed, you're right. Thanks.
      $endgroup$
      – Wuestenfux
      Jan 8 at 8:37
















    1












    $begingroup$

    Divide $2a+1$ into $9a+4$ giving $9a+4 = 9/2cdot (2a+1) - 1/2$ or $2(9a+4) = 9(2a+1)-1$, or $1= -2(9a+4) + 9(2a+1)$. So each divisor of $9a+4$ and $2a+1$ divides $1$.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      You are dividing $2a+1$ into $9a+4$, not the other way around as you have typed.
      $endgroup$
      – Michael Munta
      Jan 7 at 18:27










    • $begingroup$
      Indeed, you're right. Thanks.
      $endgroup$
      – Wuestenfux
      Jan 8 at 8:37














    1












    1








    1





    $begingroup$

    Divide $2a+1$ into $9a+4$ giving $9a+4 = 9/2cdot (2a+1) - 1/2$ or $2(9a+4) = 9(2a+1)-1$, or $1= -2(9a+4) + 9(2a+1)$. So each divisor of $9a+4$ and $2a+1$ divides $1$.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$



    Divide $2a+1$ into $9a+4$ giving $9a+4 = 9/2cdot (2a+1) - 1/2$ or $2(9a+4) = 9(2a+1)-1$, or $1= -2(9a+4) + 9(2a+1)$. So each divisor of $9a+4$ and $2a+1$ divides $1$.







    share|cite|improve this answer














    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer








    edited Jan 8 at 8:36

























    answered Jan 4 at 15:39









    WuestenfuxWuestenfux

    5,3631513




    5,3631513












    • $begingroup$
      You are dividing $2a+1$ into $9a+4$, not the other way around as you have typed.
      $endgroup$
      – Michael Munta
      Jan 7 at 18:27










    • $begingroup$
      Indeed, you're right. Thanks.
      $endgroup$
      – Wuestenfux
      Jan 8 at 8:37


















    • $begingroup$
      You are dividing $2a+1$ into $9a+4$, not the other way around as you have typed.
      $endgroup$
      – Michael Munta
      Jan 7 at 18:27










    • $begingroup$
      Indeed, you're right. Thanks.
      $endgroup$
      – Wuestenfux
      Jan 8 at 8:37
















    $begingroup$
    You are dividing $2a+1$ into $9a+4$, not the other way around as you have typed.
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Munta
    Jan 7 at 18:27




    $begingroup$
    You are dividing $2a+1$ into $9a+4$, not the other way around as you have typed.
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Munta
    Jan 7 at 18:27












    $begingroup$
    Indeed, you're right. Thanks.
    $endgroup$
    – Wuestenfux
    Jan 8 at 8:37




    $begingroup$
    Indeed, you're right. Thanks.
    $endgroup$
    – Wuestenfux
    Jan 8 at 8:37











    0












    $begingroup$

    As Siong Thye Goh said, we can use the Euclidean algorithm to guide us to a proof. The Euclidean algorithm is based on the fact that $gcd(x,y)=gcd(x,y-tx)$. If we take $x=2a+1$, $y=9a+4$, and $t=4$, then we get $gcd(2a+1,9a+4)=gcd(2a+1,a)$. Applying it again with $x=a$, $y=2a+1$, $t=2$, we get $gcd(2a+1,a)=gcd(1,a)$. From there, it's easy to see that the gcd is $1$.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$


















      0












      $begingroup$

      As Siong Thye Goh said, we can use the Euclidean algorithm to guide us to a proof. The Euclidean algorithm is based on the fact that $gcd(x,y)=gcd(x,y-tx)$. If we take $x=2a+1$, $y=9a+4$, and $t=4$, then we get $gcd(2a+1,9a+4)=gcd(2a+1,a)$. Applying it again with $x=a$, $y=2a+1$, $t=2$, we get $gcd(2a+1,a)=gcd(1,a)$. From there, it's easy to see that the gcd is $1$.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$
















        0












        0








        0





        $begingroup$

        As Siong Thye Goh said, we can use the Euclidean algorithm to guide us to a proof. The Euclidean algorithm is based on the fact that $gcd(x,y)=gcd(x,y-tx)$. If we take $x=2a+1$, $y=9a+4$, and $t=4$, then we get $gcd(2a+1,9a+4)=gcd(2a+1,a)$. Applying it again with $x=a$, $y=2a+1$, $t=2$, we get $gcd(2a+1,a)=gcd(1,a)$. From there, it's easy to see that the gcd is $1$.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        As Siong Thye Goh said, we can use the Euclidean algorithm to guide us to a proof. The Euclidean algorithm is based on the fact that $gcd(x,y)=gcd(x,y-tx)$. If we take $x=2a+1$, $y=9a+4$, and $t=4$, then we get $gcd(2a+1,9a+4)=gcd(2a+1,a)$. Applying it again with $x=a$, $y=2a+1$, $t=2$, we get $gcd(2a+1,a)=gcd(1,a)$. From there, it's easy to see that the gcd is $1$.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Jan 11 at 19:25









        AcccumulationAcccumulation

        7,2152619




        7,2152619






























            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%2f3061760%2fgcd2a1-9a4-1%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

            Probability when a professor distributes a quiz and homework assignment to a class of n students.

            Image
            0 0 $begingroup$ Need help with this problem. Suppose our lazy professor collects a quiz and a homework assignment from a class of n students one day, then distributes both the quizzes and the homework assignments back to the class in a random fashion for grading. Each student receives one quiz and one homework assignment to grade. (a) What is the probability that every student receives someone else's quiz to grade, and someone else's homework to grade? (b) What is the probability that no student receives both their own quiz and their own homework assignment to grade? In this case, some students may receive their own quiz, and others may receive their own homework assignment. (c) Compute the limiting probability as n approaches infinity in each case. ...
            Read more

            Aardman Animations

            Image
            Aardman Animations, Ltd. Aardman Animations Tipo privada Atividade Animação em stop-motion , Animação em CGI Fundação 1972 Fundador(es) Peter Lord David Sproxton Sede Bristol, Inglaterra  Reino Unido Proprietário(s) Dreamworks Pessoas-chave Peter Lord David Sproxton Nick Park Divisões Aardman Features Aardman Digital Aardman Commercials Aardman Broadcast Aardman International Aardman Rights Aardman Effects Aardman 3-D Systems Aardman Nathan Love AardBoiled Website oficial aardman.com ...
            Read more

            Are they similar matrix

            Image
            0 $begingroup$ Do $begin{bmatrix} 0&i&0\0&0&1\0&0&0 end{bmatrix} $ and $begin{bmatrix} 0&0&0\-i&0&0\0&1&0 end{bmatrix} $ are similar.Is this True/false Clearly both are nilpotent and one is conjucate transpose of other but how to know if they are similar.i'm stuck. Please help me linear-algebra vector-spaces eigenvalues-eigenvectors generalizedeigenvector share | cite | improve this question edited Dec 10 '18 at 6:38 Vasanth Kris asked Dec 10 '18 at 6:19 ...
            Read more