Re: A fairly simple proposition
From: I.M.Davidson (sttscitrans_at_tesco.net)
Date: 11/14/04
- Next message: Arturo Magidin: "Re: JSH has gotten a lot clearer"
- Previous message: Jesse F. Hughes: "Re: Cantor's diagonal proof wrong?"
- In reply to: Doug Goncz : "Re: A fairly simple proposition"
- Next in thread: Doug Goncz : "Re: A fairly simple proposition"
- Reply: Doug Goncz : "Re: A fairly simple proposition"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 14 Nov 2004 12:56:44 -0800
dgoncz@aol.com ( Doug Goncz ) wrote in message news:<20041114082048.07117.00000599@mb-m10.aol.com>...
> Well, I recall something like if gcd(a,b,c)=1 then gcd(a+b, c-a, c-b)=1...
>
> A counterexample woudl certainly be useful, but I'd like to hear some theory.
> It's really pretty bare. Just the two conditions gcd(a,b,c)=1 and a<b<c<(a+b)
> do produce c-a !== 0 (mod b) OR c-b !== 0 in my searches to c=101. But why
> would that be? I haven't found a counterexample.
>
> What's the symbol for OR? V? or \/?
>
> Restating:
>
> Given
> 0<a,b,c
> a<b<c<(a+b)
> gcd(a,b,c)=1
>
> Proposition:
> c-a !== 0 (mod b) \/ c-b !== 0 (mod a)
>
> Proposition true? Counterexample? Discussion?
c-a == 0 (mod b) => c = a +mb
c-b == 0 (mod a) => c = b +na
a < b < c <a+b
a< b < a +mb < a+b
a< b < b +na < a+b
=> 0 < m,n < 1
so c cannot be an integer.
- Next message: Arturo Magidin: "Re: JSH has gotten a lot clearer"
- Previous message: Jesse F. Hughes: "Re: Cantor's diagonal proof wrong?"
- In reply to: Doug Goncz : "Re: A fairly simple proposition"
- Next in thread: Doug Goncz : "Re: A fairly simple proposition"
- Reply: Doug Goncz : "Re: A fairly simple proposition"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|