To test whether a number is prime or not, why do we have to test whether it is divisible only up to the square root of that number?
Let's suppose that the given integer N
is not prime,
Then N can be factorized into two factors a
and b
, 2 <= a, b < N
such that N = a*b
.
Clearly, both of them can't be greater than sqrt(N)
simultaneously.
Let us assume without loss of generality that a
is smaller.
Now, if you could not find any divisor of N
belonging in the range [2, sqrt(N)]
, what does that mean?
This means that N
does not have any divisor in [2, a]
as a <= sqrt(N)
.
Therefore, a = 1
and b = n
and hence By definition, N
is prime.
...
Further reading if you are not satisfied:
Many different combinations of (a, b)
may be possible. Let's say they are:
(a1, b1), (a2, b2), (a3, b3), ..... , (ak, bk). Without loss of generality, assume ai < bi, 1<= i <=k
.
Now, to be able to show that N
is not prime it is sufficient to show that none of ai can be factorized further. And we also know that ai <= sqrt(N)
and thus you need to check till sqrt(N)
which will cover all ai. And hence you will be able to conclude whether or not N
is prime.
...