My hunch is that this is true. Consider the prime decomposition of $a$ and $b$, then $p$ cannot divide $a+b$ if it does not appear in the decomposition of $a$ and $b$, so it must divide both numbers. Is my sketch correct?
Asked
Active
Viewed 1,383 times
2
-
3try $p=2$ and $a=3$ and $b=5$ – Juniven Acapulco Apr 06 '17 at 11:34
-
2Try $p=2$, $a=b=1$. Any prime can be decomposed in a sum of smaller numbers that it does not individually divide. – Olivier Apr 06 '17 at 11:37
4 Answers
3
Your assertion is not correct.
You can say that if $p $ divides $a $ then it must divide $b$, because $p$ divides $a+b $ and $a $ so it divides $a+b-a=b $, in a similar way if $p $ divides $b $ then it must divide $a $.
Your assertion is wrong as you can take $p=2$ and $a$, $b $ any two odd numbers, then $p $ divides $a+b $ but it does not divide $a $ nor $b $.
Jonathaniui
- 541
1
It Is Not True Try $a = 11 \quad b = 17 \quad p = 7$. I f $p $ divides $a+b$: Then $p$ divides the sum of the remainders of $a $ and $b$ to their euclidean division to $p$.
Or in an other form: $$a\equiv -b\pmod p$$ Nothing more...
Rami Zouari
- 129
0
Taking a simple counter example, let $p =5, a=2,b=3$ then $a+b=5\implies p\mid a+b$
But $5\nmid3$ and $5\nmid2$ so the statement fails.
Michael Burr
- 32,867
mrnovice
- 5,773