Difference between revisions of "Bézout's Identity"
Etmetalakret (talk | contribs) (Created page with "'''Bezout's Lemma''' states that if <math>x</math> and <math>y</math> are nonzero integers and <math>g = \gcd(x,y)</math>, then there exist integers <math>\alpha</...") |
Etmetalakret (talk | contribs) m |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
− | ''' | + | '''Bézout's Identity''' states that if <math>x</math> and <math>y</math> are nonzero [[Integer|integers]] and <math>g = \gcd(x,y)</math>, then there exist integers <math>\alpha</math> and <math>\beta</math> such that <math>x\alpha+y\beta=g</math>. In other words, there exists a linear combination of <math>x</math> and <math>y</math> equal to <math>g</math>. |
Furthermore, <math>g</math> is the smallest positive integer that can be expressed in this form, i.e. <math>g = \min\{x\alpha+y\beta|\alpha,\beta\in\mathbb Z, x\alpha+y\beta > 0\}</math>. | Furthermore, <math>g</math> is the smallest positive integer that can be expressed in this form, i.e. <math>g = \min\{x\alpha+y\beta|\alpha,\beta\in\mathbb Z, x\alpha+y\beta > 0\}</math>. | ||
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
Now to prove <math>g</math> is minimum, consider any positive integer <math>g' = x\alpha'+y\beta'</math>. As <math>g|x,y</math> we get <math>g|x\alpha'+y\beta' = g'</math>, and as <math>g</math> and <math>g'</math> are both positive integers this gives <math>g\le g'</math>. So <math>g</math> is indeed the minimum. | Now to prove <math>g</math> is minimum, consider any positive integer <math>g' = x\alpha'+y\beta'</math>. As <math>g|x,y</math> we get <math>g|x\alpha'+y\beta' = g'</math>, and as <math>g</math> and <math>g'</math> are both positive integers this gives <math>g\le g'</math>. So <math>g</math> is indeed the minimum. | ||
− | ==Generalization/Extension of | + | ==Generalization/Extension of Bézout's Identity== |
Let <math>a_1, a_2,..., a_m</math> be positive integers. Then there exists integers <math>x_1, x_2, ..., x_m</math> such that | Let <math>a_1, a_2,..., a_m</math> be positive integers. Then there exists integers <math>x_1, x_2, ..., x_m</math> such that | ||
<cmath>\sum_{i=1}^{m} a_ix_i = \gcd(a_1, a_2, ..., a_m)</cmath> Also, <math>\gcd(a_1, a_2, ..., a_m)</math> is the least positive integer satisfying this property. | <cmath>\sum_{i=1}^{m} a_ix_i = \gcd(a_1, a_2, ..., a_m)</cmath> Also, <math>\gcd(a_1, a_2, ..., a_m)</math> is the least positive integer satisfying this property. |
Revision as of 15:50, 6 September 2023
Bézout's Identity states that if and are nonzero integers and , then there exist integers and such that . In other words, there exists a linear combination of and equal to .
Furthermore, is the smallest positive integer that can be expressed in this form, i.e. . In particular, if and are relatively prime then there are integers and for which .
Proof
Let , , and notice that .
Since , . So is smallest positive for which . Now if for all integers , we have that , then one of those integers must be 1 from the Pigeonhole Principle. Assume for contradiction that , and WLOG let . Then, , and so as we saw above this means but this is impossible since . Thus there exists an such that .
Therefore , and so there exists an integer such that , and so . Now multiplying through by gives, , or .
Thus there does exist integers and such that .
Now to prove is minimum, consider any positive integer . As we get , and as and are both positive integers this gives . So is indeed the minimum.
Generalization/Extension of Bézout's Identity
Let be positive integers. Then there exists integers such that Also, is the least positive integer satisfying this property.
Proof
Consider the set . Obviously, . Thus, because all the elements of are positive, by the Well Ordering Principle, there exists a minimal element . So
if and then But by the Division Algorithm:
But so this would imply that which contradicts the assumption that is the minimal element in . Thus, hence, . But this would imply that for because . Now, because for we have that . But then we also have that . Thus, we have that