anonymous
  • anonymous
Proove that two Fermat numbers always are relatively prime. I have the lead that F_m | (F_n - 2) for m
Mathematics
  • Stacey Warren - Expert brainly.com
Hey! We 've verified this expert answer for you, click below to unlock the details :)
SOLVED
At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
chestercat
  • chestercat
I got my questions answered at brainly.com in under 10 minutes. Go to brainly.com now for free help!
anonymous
  • anonymous
@myininaya
anonymous
  • anonymous
I've tried to understand the solution here: https://www.artofproblemsolving.com/Wiki/index.php/Fermat_number but don't really understand it.
anonymous
  • anonymous
I also have this solution but don't understand it neither

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.

More answers

myininaya
  • myininaya
Hey, so from that link the only thing I don't understand so far is why all of that shows that they are relatively prime. I do understand everything else though.... So still thinking as to why it shows they are....
anonymous
  • anonymous
I thinks it has to do with the fact that every Fermat number is odd so can not be divided by two and hence the only gcd is 1
myininaya
  • myininaya
Yeah. lol. I think you are right.
anonymous
  • anonymous
Woho! :)
anonymous
  • anonymous
But who do they get the recursion formula from \[F _{n}=2^{2^{n}}+1\]
myininaya
  • myininaya
The induction part confuses you?
myininaya
  • myininaya
\[F_0=2^{2^0}+1=2^1+1=2+1=3 \] \[F_1=2^{2^1}+1=2^2+1=4+1=5=3+2 \] \[F_2=2^{2^2}+1=2^4+1=16+1=17=15+2 =3(5)+2=F_0 \cdot F_1 +2 \]
anonymous
  • anonymous
Wonderful!
anonymous
  • anonymous
So when one have the recursion formula \[F _{n+1}=F _{0}*F _{1}*F _{2}*...*F _{n}+2\] The solution is to show that the recursion formula is correct using induction, right?
myininaya
  • myininaya
Yes :)
myininaya
  • myininaya
They are proving it :) Proving that will prove gcd(Fm,Fn)=1
myininaya
  • myininaya
If you need help with the algebra, I can do that. Right now, I'm multitasking though...so I will help slowly.
anonymous
  • anonymous
So there are two things I don't understand the first is:\[F _{k+1}=2^{2^{k+1}}+1\] \[=\left( \left( 2^{2^{k}} \right)^{2} +2*2^{2^{k}}+1 \right) - 2*2^{2^{k}}\]
anonymous
  • anonymous
The second thing is \[\gcd(F _{m},F _{n})=\gcd(F _{m},2)\]
myininaya
  • myininaya
\[=2^{2^{k+1}}+1=2^{2^k2^1}+1=2^{2^k 2}+1=(2^{2^k})^2+1\]
myininaya
  • myininaya
They added in a zero.
anonymous
  • anonymous
Why did the add the zero for?
myininaya
  • myininaya
\[=(2^{2^k}+1)^2+1-2 \cdot 2^{2^k} \] So they can write that one part as Fk
myininaya
  • myininaya
or F_0F_1F_2...F_(K-1)+2
myininaya
  • myininaya
They were setting up for the induction part
myininaya
  • myininaya
\[=(2^{2^k}+1)(2^{2^k}+1)-2^{2^k}\] Ignore that 1oops
myininaya
  • myininaya
the one in expression i wrote before this one
myininaya
  • myininaya
We are trying to show F_0F_1....F_k+2
anonymous
  • anonymous
Ok I think I get the whole induction proof now.
anonymous
  • anonymous
So seeing that \[F _{k+1}=F _{0}*F _{1}...*F _{k-1}*F _{k}+2\] How do I know that \[GCD(F _{m},F _{n})=GCD(F _{m},2)\]
myininaya
  • myininaya
Please ask any questions if you have them. I like this proof.
anonymous
  • anonymous
* given that m
myininaya
  • myininaya
Well gcd(odd,2)=1 since odd aren't divisible by 2
anonymous
  • anonymous
Sorry formulated it bad, I mean how do I know that gcd F_n is 2 ?
myininaya
  • myininaya
no Fn is not equal to 2
anonymous
  • anonymous
* F_n is replaces by two *
anonymous
  • anonymous
So where does the replacement of F_n to 2 come from?
myininaya
  • myininaya
gcd(Fm,Fn) = gcd(Fm,F0F1...F(n-1)+2) What about this?
anonymous
  • anonymous
Sorry don't understand, Isn't that equal to f_(n+1)?
anonymous
  • anonymous
Has it to do with the initial lead F_m | (F_n - 2) ?
myininaya
  • myininaya
Well F_(n+1) equals F0F1....Fn+2 ---- Anyways, Fm|(Fn-2) =>for some integer k we have k*Fm=Fn-2 => k*Fm+2=Fn So gcd(Fm,Fn) = gcd(Fm, k*Fm+2) Let gcd(Fm, k*Fm+2)=d => for some integers a and b we have aFm+b(k*Fm+2)=d Fm(a+bk)+2b=d But a+bk and b are just integers We know gcd(Fm,2)=1 since Fm is odd and isn't divisible by 2. This implies for some integers s and t we have sFm+2t=1 where s above is a+bk and t is b from above. Did this make it more confusing?
myininaya
  • myininaya
Implies d=1
anonymous
  • anonymous
Not at all, that made perfect sense actually
anonymous
  • anonymous
Will have to put it all together and solve it 2-3 times just to make sure it stays in my brain but you're given me the broad understanding, can't thank you enough!
myininaya
  • myininaya
I try.
anonymous
  • anonymous
Thank you for your patience, have a great evening!
myininaya
  • myininaya
You too. :)

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.