-3

Examples:

4 shares no factors with 7, and 4+7=11, which also shares no factors with 7

15 shares no factors with 16, and 15+16=31, which also shares no factors with 16

21 shares no factors with 17, and 21+17=38, which also shares no factors with 17

11 shares no factors with 13, and 11+13=24, which also shares no factors with 13

dxiv
  • 76,497

2 Answers2

1

If $p$ is a number that divides both $n+m$ and $m$, then it also divides their difference, $(n+m)-m$, which is $n$. Since we assume that $m,n$ are coprime, then $p=1$.

G Tony Jacobs
  • 31,218
0

First off, you should probably word your problem more rigorously, and say what you did or didn't try yourself. Also, use MathJax to format your math statements.

Anyway, the proof is as follows.

Suppose $n,m\in\mathbb{Z}$ such that $n$ and $m$ are coprime, that is to say, $(n, m)=1$. This notation means GCD of $n$ and $m$ is $1$, in case you didn't know, which is an equivalent statement to "sharing no factors".

Now, let $k$ be a shared factor of $n+m$ and $m$.

Then, $k|m$ and $k|n+m$.

So, there exists some $a,b\in\mathbb{Z}$, such that $ka = m$ and $kb = n+m$.

Substituting for $m$ in the second equation, we get $$kb = n + ka$$ $$ kb - ka = n $$ $$ k(b-a) = n $$

And since $n+m \gt m$, we know that $b \gt a$, so $b-a \gt 0$.

So, by definition, $k|n$.

Now, since $n$ and $m$ are coprime, and $k$ is a shared factor, it must be that $k|1$, which means that $k=1$.

Thus, any shared factor of $n+m$ and $m$ must necessarily be $1$, so $n+m$ and $m$ are coprime.

Also, note that $n+m$ would also be coprime with $n$ by the same logic.

Shou
  • 97
  • This isn't really an argument by contradiction, because you haven't assumed that $k>1$. Indeed, you have proven that $k|1$, which is enough to get the desired result without appealing to any contradiction. – G Tony Jacobs May 15 '23 at 03:36
  • oops, you're right, silly mistake. Since k divides n and m, and they're coprime, naturally it has to be 1. I'll correct this. – Shou May 15 '23 at 03:38