This set is due Monday, October 18.
- Given arithmetic functions
, define their convolution
by
so that if
is the Dirichlet series associated to a function
, then
.
Last homework we showed that
, i.e.,
, where
is the function that always takes the value
, and
is the function that takes value 1 at 1, and 0 otherwise.
Prove the Möbius inversion formula: If
, i.e.,
for all
, then
for all
. (This is Theorem 6.14 in the text, try to prove it without looking at the argument there.)
Use this and the fact shown in class that
to find a formula for Euler’s
.
A function
is multiplicative iff
whenever
are relatively prime. Let
be the function defined by
. Show that if
is multiplicative, then so is
.
Also, solve exercise 8.2.5 from the book.
- This exercise continues the analysis of
from the first homework. First, by induction on
, show that any
that is not a unit and is not 0 is a product of irreducibles.Second, show that
is a principal ideal domain (pid). This means that
has no zero divisors and that every ideal is principal. You may want to look up the meaning of these terms in an abstract algebra book if needed. Here is a hint, it should remind you of the corresponding argument we proved for
: Given an ideal
, let
be of minimal norm among the nonzero elements of
. We want to show that
consists precisely of the multiples of
. For this, show that the
with
form the vertices of an infinite family of squares that fill up the plane. For example, one of these squares has vertices
. Check that
contains all these
, and nothing else, or else a geometric argument shows that
is not minimal.
Use that
is a pid to conclude that
admits unique factorization.
Here is a way of using these results to show Fermat’s two squares theorem: Let
be a prime with
. We know that the equation
has a solution
. Use that
to conclude that
is not irreducible in
. By considering a product
where neither
nor
is a unit, and taking norms, conclude that
must be a sum of two squares.
- The goal of this exercise is to show that the proof given in lecture of Fermat’s result discussed in the previous exercise generalizes to show:
- A prime
is of the form
iff
or
.
- A prime
is of the form
iff
.
First, check that for any
,
We proved that if
is sum of two relatively prime squares and so is the prime
, and
, then
is itself sum of two relatively prime squares. State and prove the appropriate version of this result for each of the two cases we are now considering. Check that the argument works when
and
(although of course 4 is not prime).
Show that the descent argument can be adapted to show that if a prime
divides a number of the form
with
, then
has the form
.
Show the similar result for
. Be careful, since you must ensure that the prime
that is obtained in this case is odd (because the result fails for
).
Suppose that
is prime. Prove that
has a solution, by appropriately factoring
.
Conclude the proofs.
- A prime
Typeset using LaTeX2WP. Here is a printable version of this post.
Dr. Caicedo:
I’m having trouble interpreting the l-function defined on p. 275 in reference to exercise 8.2.5 in our text. I’m not sure the difference between l(n) and the von Mangoldt Function. I mean I can read the difference: in
, n = p is a prime power; and in von Mangoldt, it’s
is a prime power. I’m just not sure how to interpret the difference.
Thanks for any help.
I guess I mean to ask would say n = 9 count as a prime power for
?
Oh, that’s a typo! I have it in my list but hadn’t typed it yet, sorry.
For
,
needs to be a prime number. Also, for
,
needs to be a non-trivial prime power, i.e.,
.
Thank you!