December 19th, 2018, 02:33 AM  #1 
Member Joined: Nov 2012 Posts: 80 Thanks: 1  Direct Proof
It assumes that n = r*s and check whether r is a prime number or not, but why it does not require to check whether s is a prime number. Moreover, the last paragraph says there are at most n2 possible values. What does this sentence mean? Thank you. 
December 19th, 2018, 05:02 AM  #2 
Senior Member Joined: Apr 2014 From: UK Posts: 898 Thanks: 329 
Can you have another go at scanning it in?

December 19th, 2018, 05:29 AM  #3 
Member Joined: Nov 2012 Posts: 80 Thanks: 1 
Sorry, it is my bad. Hope it is better.


Tags 
direct, proof 
Thread Tools  
Display Modes  

Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Direct proof for this inequality theorem  agent1594  Calculus  2  July 12th, 2016 10:53 PM 
Direct sum of HomSets  Woita  Abstract Algebra  1  July 7th, 2014 02:29 PM 
Discrete math direct proof question  mgk501  Real Analysis  2  March 21st, 2013 12:23 PM 
Direct Proof?  jrklx250s  Real Analysis  3  December 3rd, 2011 03:58 AM 
Direct product  gianni  Abstract Algebra  2  December 2nd, 2010 05:00 AM 