MATH312 December 2008
Work in progress: this question page is incomplete, there might be mistakes in the material you are seeing here.
• Q1 (a) • Q1 (b) • Q1 (c) • Q1 (d) • Q1 (e) • Q1 (f) • Q2 (a) i • Q2 (a) ii • Q2 (a) iii • Q2 (a) iv • Q2 (b) • Q3 (a) • Q3 (b) • Q3 (c) • Q4 (a) • Q4 (b) • Q4 (c) • Q5 (a) • Q5 (b) • Q5 (c) • Q6 (a) • Q6 (b) • Q6 (c) • Q6 (d) •
[hide]Question 04 (c)
|
Show, without using the explicit prime factorization of 1729, but using the following congruences instead, that 1729 is composite.
|
Make sure you understand the problem fully: What is the question asking you to do? Are there specific conditions or constraints that you should take note of? How will you know if your answer is correct from your work only? Can you rephrase the question in your own words in a way that makes sense to you?
|
If you are stuck, check the hint below. Consider it for a while. Does it give you a new idea on how to approach the problem? If so, try it!
|
[show]Hint
|
This idea is similar to the idea in Miller's Test. Suppose that 1729 is prime. How many solutions should have?
|
Checking a solution serves two purposes: helping you if, after having used the hint, you still are stuck on the problem; or if you have solved the problem and would like to check your work.
- If you are stuck on a problem: Read the solution slowly and as soon as you feel you could finish the problem on your own, hide it and work on the problem. Come back later to the solution if you are stuck or if you want to check your work.
- If you want to check your work: Don't only focus on the answer, problems are mostly marked for the work you do, make sure you understand all the steps that were required to complete the problem and see if you made mistakes or forgot some aspects. Your goal is to check that your mental process was correct, not only the result.
|
[show]Solution
|
Assume towards a contradiction that 1729 is prime. Look at
If this were prime, we would have that the only two solutions to this equation are given by and (if you haven't seen this before, isolate for 0, factor and argue that because we've assumed that 1729 is prime, it has to divide one of the factors). However, notice that from the given congruences, we have that but
and this is a contradiction. Hence 1729 is not prime.
|
Click here for similar questions
MER QGQ flag, MER RH flag, MER RS flag, MER RT flag, MER Tag Miller's test, Pages using DynamicPageList3 parser function, Pages using DynamicPageList3 parser tag
|
Math Learning Centre
- A space to study math together.
- Free math graduate and undergraduate TA support.
- Mon - Fri: 12 pm - 5 pm in MATH 102 and 5 pm - 7 pm online through Canvas.
|