3

My lecturer gave us the following side note when explaining the euclidean algorithm in class.

Eucledian Algorithm: Let $a$ and $b$ be natural numbers, then there are integers $m$ and $n$ such that $\gcd(a, b) = am + bn$

The implementation of the Euclidean Algorithm consists of a sequence of repetitions of the Division Algorithm with the integers m and n being obtained by unravelling this sequence of steps. To appreciate why such an operation identifies $\gcd(a, b)$, we may start with the assumption that $a > b$ otherwise $\gcd(a, b) = a$ (the case $a = b$) and there is nothing to be done. When $a > b$ the Division Algorithm asserts that $a = bq + r$ with $0 r < b.$ There are two points to note. a) Since $\gcd(a, b)$ divides $a$ and $b$ so $\gcd(a, b)$ must also divide the remainder $r.$ Therefore the greatest common divisor of $a$ and $b$ is also the greatest common divisor of $b$ and $r$, that is, $\gcd(a, b) = \gcd(b, r)$. b) Since $b < a$ and $r < b$ the sequence of applications of the Division Algorithm generates a strictly decreasing sequence of remainders terminating with 0, but such that each remainder is divisible by $\gcd(b, r)$. By definition, the penultimate remainder is therefore $\gcd(a, b)$.

I understand and can apply the algorithm, i.e. I can do the repeated division and find the gcd. But I still don't understand the part in bold above. Why can we just assume that?

When trying to prove the same for polynomials in a tutorial homework, I simply used a modified version of the part in bold as a lemma, specifically:

Any polynomial divisor of both $f(x)$ and $g(x)$ must also divide the remainder polynomial when $f(x)$ is divided by $g(x)$

and the tutor made no remark, so I'm assuming this is something which can be clearly seen but that I'm missing. Could anyone please break it down for me?

Bill Dubuque
  • 272,048
Scb
  • 260

4 Answers4

5

Let $d=\gcd(a,b)$. You know $d$ divides both $a$ and $b$, and that means there are integers $k,l\in\mathbb{Z}$ such that $a=dk,b=dl$. And hence:

$r=a-bq=dk-dlq=d(k-lq)$

When $k-lq\in\mathbb{Z}$. So we got $d$ divides $r$.

Mark
  • 39,605
  • Note the proper notation for "gcd", as in my edit to this answer. The backslash not only prevents italicization but also results in proper spacing in things like $4\gcd(a,b).$ Thus, for example, if \text{gcd} instead of \gcd were used, you'd see $4\text{gcd}(a,b)$ instead of $4\gcd(a,b),$ and the amount of space between "$\gcd$" and the thing that precedes it actually depends on the context. – Michael Hardy Oct 04 '18 at 19:21
  • I'll take that in note. Thanks for telling me. – Mark Oct 04 '18 at 19:36
2

Key Idea $ $ Sets of $\rm\color{#c00}{integer}$ multiples (of $\,d)$ enjoy a fundamental linear structure - namely they are closed under $\rm\color{#c00}{integral}$ linear combinations, i.e.

$\ \ $ if $\,\ \begin{align}a = \color{#c00}j\,d\\ b = \color{#c00}k\,d\end{align}\ \,$ are multiples of $\,d\,$ then so too is $\,ma\!+\!nb = \color{#c00}{(mj\!+\!nk)}d,\ $ for all integers $\,\color{#c00}{m,n}$

$ r = a\color{#c00}{-q}\,b\,$ is an $\rm\color{#c00}{integral}$ linear combination of multiples $\,a,b\,$ of $\,d\,$ so it too is a multiple of $\,d$.

Example $ $ If $\,ma+nb = 1\,$ then every common divisor of $a,b$ also divides $1,$ so $\,a,b\,$ are coprime.

The same is true for multiples in any ring $R\,$ if we replace the $\rm\color{#c00}{integral}$ multipliers $\,\color{#c00}{m,n}\,$ by arbitrary ring elements (e.g. polynomials in your second case), i.e. we use $R$-linear combinations.

This linear algebraic structure persists for multiples of many elements ("common multiples"). It is a prototypical example of an ideal $(R$-module) - a ubiquitous structure in number theory and algebra, so it is helpful to be familiar with this fundamental linear structure early in one's studies.


Alternatively: $\,\ d\mid a,b\Rightarrow (ja\!+\!kb\bmod d)= 0\!+\!0\,$ so $\,d\mid ja\!+\!kb\,$ by divisibility mod reduction. By congruences: $ 0\equiv a,b\Rightarrow\, ja\!+\!kb\equiv j(0)\!+\!k(0)\equiv 0\pmod{\!d}\,$ by congruence sum & product rules.

Bill Dubuque
  • 272,048
1

Well, if $d$ is the gcd of $a$ and $b$, and $a = qb+r$ where $r$ is the remainder, then $r= a - qb$. Thus $d$ divides the right-hand side and so $r$.

Wuestenfux
  • 20,964
1

They are both the same:

If you ever have $k\mid M$ and $k\mid N$ then you have $k|aM \pm bN$ for any integers $a,b$.

Pf: Do we really have to prove it? $x\mid W \iff \frac Wx \in \mathbb Z$. So $\frac {aM \pm bN}k = a\frac Mk \pm b\frac Nk$. $k\mid M$ and $k\mid N$ so $\frac Mk, \frac NK$ are integers. So $\frac {aM \pm bN}k = > a\frac Mk \pm b\frac Nk$ is an integer. So $k|aM \pm bN$.

So $a = bq + r$ so $r = a - bq$ and $\gcd(a,b)|a$ and $\gcd(a,b)\mid b$ so $\gcd(a,b)\mid a - bq = r$.

That's it.

And for polynomials.

$f(x) = g(x)q(x) + r(x)$ then $r(x) = g(x)q(x) - f(x) = d(x) \left [\frac {g(x)}{d(x)} q(x) - \frac {f(x)}{d(x)} \right]$

fleablood
  • 124,253