# Prove that if $p$ is a prime, then $p^3\mid y^2\implies p\mid y^2\implies p\mid y$. [closed]

Please note that I am requesting a formal proof, using any technique.

There are two parts in the implication:
(i) if $p$ is a prime, then $p^3\mid y^2\implies p\mid y^2$,
(ii) if $p$ is a prime, then $p\mid y^2 \implies p\mid y$.

I know that, as by the post asked by me : if $p$ is a prime, and $p\mid a^k$ for any natural number $a,k$, then $p\mid a$, but the first part is not obvious from this.

## closed as off-topic by TheGeekGreek, JonMark Perry, Jimmy R., Brian Borchers, DanMar 22 '18 at 15:23

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

• "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – TheGeekGreek, JonMark Perry, Jimmy R., Brian Borchers, Dan
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

Partial Hint

It can be shown that if $p^m | a^2$, then $p^{\lceil m/2 \rceil} | a$. Your consideration here, is the case where $m=1$.

Edit (Sketch proof)

Let \begin{align} n &= \prod p_i^{n_i} \\ m &= \prod p_i^{m_i}\\ a &=\prod p_i^{a_i} \end{align} Then $n | a^2$ means that $n_i \le 2a_i$ or $a_i\ge \lceil \frac{n_i}{2} \rceil$. On the other hand $m | a$ means that $m_i \le a_i$.

If $m$ is as large as possible, $m_i = a_i$ so $m_i = \lceil \frac{n_i}{2} \rceil$.

• Please give link in MSE, or elsewhere, for its proof. – jiten Mar 22 '18 at 11:17
• @jiten Could not find a link as such, but I have given a little sketch proof of the statement. – complexmanifold Mar 22 '18 at 11:29

It is obvious from your first post, because $p\mid p^3\mid y^2$, so that $p\mid y\mid y^2$ is true. Indeed, $p\mid y^k$ implies $p\mid y$.

• Thanks a lot for that. So, it can be generalized to : for any prime $p, \exists k,n,i,j \in \mathbb{Z+},\,\, k\gt i, n\gt j,\,\, p^k\mid y^n\implies p^{k-i}\mid y^{n-j}\implies p\mid y.$ – jiten Mar 22 '18 at 10:57

(i) Since $p\mid p^3$, $p\mid y^2$

(ii) Suppose by contradiction that $p \nmid y$, but $p \mid y^2$.This implies that $yk=p$ for some integer $k$. But this is not possible since

• We know that $y \neq 1$, it is obvious.
• $k$ is not $1$, since if $k=1$ then $p\mid y$

then $y$ and $k$ are both integers greater than 1, which is not possible since $p$ is a prime. Contradiction! Hence $p$ is a prime. $\ _\square$

• Thanks, but you have proved the failure of converse indirectly (by contradiction), but have not stated this at all. You have actually stated the proof by contradiction of failure of : If $p\mid y^2$, then $p\nmid y$; which is converse of failure of : if $p \nmid y$, then $p\mid y^2$.The reason I am stating this is that you have taken the implication $yk=p$ which can 'directly' arise out of $p\mid y$ only. – jiten Mar 22 '18 at 11:41
• @jiten Thanks for the comment. I have stated that I proved by contradiction now. You said that I 'have taken the implication $yk=p$ which can 'directly' arise out of $p\mid y$ only.' Well, I am not sure what you mean but if you say that $p\mid y \implies yk=p$, I don't think that is true. $p\mid y$ means '$p$ is a factor of $y$' and means $y=pn$ for some integer $n$. What I am trying to say is that since $y$ is a factor of $p$ (since $y\mid p^2$ but $y\mid p$) hence $yk=p$ – Vee Hua Zhi Mar 22 '18 at 11:50
• Agreed, I was wrong. But, in the last line of your comment you have stated that : "(since $y\mid p^2$ but $y\mid p$) hence $yk=p$." This line is causing confusion, slrly. your answer for the same cause; as in the answer you have stated that : $p\nmid y$, but $p\mid y^2.$ I request elaborating the same. – jiten Mar 22 '18 at 12:09