Modular Arithmetic: Explained and Proven

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter davon806
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Arithmetic
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of modular arithmetic, specifically the conditions under which the additive and multiplicative properties apply to real numbers versus integers. Participants explore the implications of these properties and seek clarification on proofs related to modular equality.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the statement that the multiplicative property of modular arithmetic only applies if n is an integer, while the additive property can be applied to all real numbers.
  • Another participant provides a proof for the additive property, showing that if a_1 ≡ b_1 (mod n) and a_2 ≡ b_2 (mod n), then (a_1 + a_2) ≡ (b_1 + b_2) (mod n) holds without requiring a's, b's, or n to be integers.
  • A participant asks for clarification on a specific equation derived in the proof regarding the multiplicative property.
  • One participant explains that the multiplicative property requires a's, b's, and n to be integers, suggesting that a counterexample is needed to demonstrate why it does not hold for real numbers.
  • Another participant notes a contradiction in their proof, indicating that the multiplicative property might apply to rational numbers, but they are unable to identify the error in their reasoning.
  • A later reply suggests that the final expression in the proof should include both k1 and k2, and acknowledges that the multiplicative property might hold for specific cases of rational numbers under certain conditions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the applicability of the multiplicative property in modular arithmetic, with some arguing it only holds for integers while others propose it may hold under specific conditions for rational numbers. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the general applicability of these properties.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the need for specific conditions (such as integer values) for certain proofs, and some mention the potential for counterexamples without resolving the mathematical steps involved.

davon806
Messages
147
Reaction score
1
Please see the attached,which was quoted from the following website:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modular_arithmetic

It said that the multiplicative property is only applicable if n is an integer.On the contrary,the addition property can be applied to all real numbers.
I don't quite understand what this sentence means.Can anyone explain it to me?Any mathematical proof provided will be appreciated.
Thanks.
 

Attachments

  • ???.png
    ???.png
    9.2 KB · Views: 519
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Well suppose all a_1,a_2,b_1,b_2,n are real numbers and that
a_1=b_1 (mod n)
a_2=b_2 (mod n)
then by the definition of mod n equality we can conclude that there exist integers k_1,k_2 such that a_1-b_1=k_1n , a_2-b_2=k_2n
so by adding the last 2 equations we have (a_1+a_2)-(b_1+b_2)=(k_1+k_2)n therefore there exists the integer k_3=k_1+k_2 such that (a_1+a_2)-(b_1+b_2)=(k_3)n hence by definition of (mod n) equality this means that (a_1+a_2)=(b_1+b_2) (mod n). As you see in the proof we don't need anything of the a's or b's or the n to be integer.

However if we want to prove that a_1a_2=b_1b_2 (mod n) (1) we going to need a's and b's as well n to be integers because the proof goes like this:
a_1a_2-a_1b_2-b_1a_2+b_1b_2=k_1k_2n^2 so n has to be integer in order for (a_1a_2+b_1b_2)=(a_1b_2+b_1a_2) (mod n) (2) . We will also need a's and b's to be integers in order to prove that a_1b_2=b_1b_2 (mod n) (3.1) b_1b_2=b_1a_2 (mod n) (3.2) hold. From (2) and (3)s we can infer the (1).
 
Last edited:
Why did a1a2−a1b2−b1a2+b1b2=k1k2n2?
 
By multiplying a_1-b_1=k_1n , a_2-b_2=k_2n together. I have omitted some steps cause it isn't allowed here to give too much help with homework.

Eventually to prove why (1) doesn't hold if all a's and b's and n are real, you ll have to construct a counter example. I just pinpointed where the proof goes wrong if a's and b's and n arent all integers, but one could claim that there might be another proof specific made for when a's and b's and n are reals.
 
Last edited:
Sorry,please see the attached,I came up with a contradiction while proving the above.If my proof is correct,then the multiplicative property can be applied to rational numbers,so there must be something wrong but I couldn't find it.Thx very much
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1533.JPG
    IMG_1533.JPG
    40.4 KB · Views: 475
  • IMG_1534.JPG
    IMG_1534.JPG
    33.4 KB · Views: 510
The final expression for a1a2-b1b2 should have k1 inside as well and not only k2. Anyway it seems for specific a's and b's that satisfy some extra equations, the multiplicative property could hold for those specific rationals , but you want to hold for every rational in order to be usefull.
 
thx for your help
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
6K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
9K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K