# Lamé's Theorem

This article has been identified as a candidate for Featured Proof status.If you do not believe that this proof is worthy of being a Featured Proof, please state your reasons on the talk page.To discuss this page in more detail, feel free to use the talk page. |

## Theorem

Let $a, b \in \Z_{>0}$ be (strictly) positive integers.

Let $c$ and $d$ be the number of digits in $a$ and $b$ respectively when expressed in decimal notation.

Let the Euclidean Algorithm be employed to find the GCD of $a$ and $b$.

Then it will take fewer than $5 \times \min \set {c, d}$ integer divisions to find $\gcd \set {a, b}$.

### Variant: Least Absolute Remainder

Let $a, b \in \Z_{>0}$ be (strictly) positive integers.

Let $c$ and $d$ be the number of digits in $a$ and $b$ respectively when expressed in decimal notation.

Let the Euclidean Algorithm: Least Absolute Remainder variant be employed to find the GCD of $a$ and $b$.

Then it will in general take fewer integer divisions to find $\gcd \set {a, b}$ than it does to use the conventional form of the Euclidean Algorithm.

## Proof

### Lemma

Suppose it takes $n$ cycles around the Euclidean Algorithm to find $\gcd \set {a, b}$.

Then $\min \set {a, b} \ge F_{n + 2}$, where $F_n$ denotes the $n$-th Fibonacci number.

$\Box$

Without loss of generality suppose $a \ge b$.

Then $\min \set {c, d}$ is the number of digits in $b$.

By Number of Digits in Number, we have:

- $\min \set {c, d} = \floor {\log b} + 1$

Aiming for a contradiction, suppose it takes at least $5 \paren {\floor {\log b} + 1}$ cycles around the Euclidean Algorithm to find $\gcd \set {a, b}$.

Then we have:

\(\ds b\) | \(\ge\) | \(\ds F_{5 \paren {\floor {\log b} + 1} + 2}\) | Lemma | |||||||||||

\(\ds \) | \(\ge\) | \(\ds \phi^{5 \paren {\floor {\log b} + 1} }\) | Fibonacci Number greater than Golden Section to Power less Two | |||||||||||

\(\ds \) | \(>\) | \(\ds \phi^{5 \log b}\) | Definition of Floor Function |

For $b = 1$, both sides are equal to $1$, giving $1 > 1$, which is a contradiction.

Hence we consider $b > 1$ and take $\log$ on both sides:

\(\ds \leadsto \ \ \) | \(\ds \log b\) | \(>\) | \(\ds \paren {5 \log b} \log \phi\) | Logarithm of Power | ||||||||||

\(\ds \leadsto \ \ \) | \(\ds \frac 1 {\log \phi}\) | \(>\) | \(\ds 5\) |

However, $\dfrac 1 {\log \phi} \approx 4.785 < 5$.

This is a contradiction.

Hence the result by Proof by Contradiction.

$\blacksquare$

## Examples

### Example: $12378$ and $3054$

The Euclidean Algorithm, when employed to find the GCD of $12378$ and $3054$, will take no more than $20$ steps.

## Source of Name

This entry was named for Gabriel Lamé.

## Historical Note

This result was demonstrated by Gabriel Lamé in $1844$.

## Sources

- 1980: David M. Burton:
*Elementary Number Theory*(revised ed.) ... (previous) ... (next): Chapter $2$: Divisibility Theory in the Integers: $2.3$ The Euclidean Algorithm - 1986: David Wells:
*Curious and Interesting Numbers*... (previous) ... (next): $5$ - 1997: David Wells:
*Curious and Interesting Numbers*(2nd ed.) ... (previous) ... (next): $5$ - 2008: David Nelson:
*The Penguin Dictionary of Mathematics*(4th ed.) ... (previous) ... (next):**Euclidean algorithm** - 2008: David Nelson:
*The Penguin Dictionary of Mathematics*(4th ed.) ... (previous) ... (next):**Lamé's theorem**