Show that any composite three-digit number must have a prime factor

In summary: Since this is not the case, any composite three-digit number must have a prime factor less than or equal to ## 31 ##.Therefore, we have ## a,b\geq 37 ##.In summary, any composite three-digit number must have a prime factor less than or equal to ## 31 ##.
  • #1
Math100
809
227
Homework Statement
Show that any composite three-digit number must have a prime factor less than or equal to ## 31 ##.
Relevant Equations
None.
Proof:

Suppose for the sake of contradiction that any composite three-digit number
must have a prime factor not less than or equal to ## 31 ##.
Let ## n ## be any composite three-digit number such that ## n=ab ## for
some ## a,b\in\mathbb{Z} ## where ## a,b>1 ##.
Note that the smallest prime factor greater than ## 31 ## is ## 37 ##.
Then we have ## a,b\geq 37 ##.
Thus ## n=ab\geq (37)^2=1369 ##.
This is a contradiction because ## 1369 ## is not a composite three-digit number.
Therefore, any composite three-digit number must have a prime factor less than or equal to ## 31 ##.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Math100 said:
Then we have ## a,b\geq 37 ##.
Better would be "##max(a, b) \ge 37##"
The largest three-digit number is 999. ##\sqrt{999} \approx 31.61##, so if ##n = ab## is a three-digit composite number that is smaller than 999, the larger of its prime factors must be less than or equal to 31.
 
  • Like
Likes Math100
  • #3
I omitted the fact that for any composite, positive integer N, the largest prime factor must be less than or equal to ##\sqrt N##. You might want to prove that as a lemma that supports the problem you're working on.
 
  • #4
Mark44 said:
I omitted the fact that for any composite, positive integer N, the largest prime factor must be less than or equal to ##\sqrt N##. You might want to prove that as a lemma that supports the problem you're working on.
Do I need to change my proof to another method? Or is proof by contradiction okay?
 
  • #5
I don't see anything wrong with your proof, except that it less direct than it could be.
 
  • #6
Mark44 said:
I don't see anything wrong with your proof, except that it less direct than it could be.
About where should I insert the lemma which you've mentioned?
 
  • #7
Math100 said:
About where should I insert the lemma which you've mentioned?
A lemma should come before a proof that refers to it.
 
  • #8
Lemma: For any composite positive integer ## N ##,
the largest prime factor must be less than or equal to ## \sqrt{N} ##.

Proof:

Note that the largest composite three-digit number is ## 999 ##.
Thus ## \sqrt{N}=\sqrt{999}\approx 31.61 ##.
Therefore, any composite three-digit number must have a prime factor
less than or equal to ## 31 ##.
 
  • #9
But you should provide a proof of the lemma...
 
  • #10
Math100 said:
Homework Statement:: Show that any composite three-digit number must have a prime factor less than or equal to ## 31 ##.
Relevant Equations:: None.

Proof:

Suppose for the sake of contradiction that any composite three-digit number
must have a prime factor not less than or equal to ## 31 ##.
This is not the negation of the original proposition. The negation should be:

There exists a composite three-digit number with no primes factors less than or equal to 31.
 
  • Like
Likes Math100
Back
Top