Can co-prime numbers raise to a power that is equal to 1 mod(n)?

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Poirot1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Challenge
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the mathematical proof that if \( n = xy \) is a positive integer where \( x \) and \( y \) are co-prime integers greater than 2, and \( a \) is co-prime to \( n \), then \( a^{\frac{\phi(n)}{2}} \equiv 1 \mod(n) \). The proof utilizes Euler's theorem, which states that \( a^{\phi(n)} \equiv 1 \mod(n) \), and demonstrates that assuming \( a^{\frac{\phi(n)}{2}} \equiv -1 \mod(n) \) leads to a contradiction. The discussion emphasizes the necessity of applying the Chinese Remainder Theorem (CRT) for both \( x \) and \( y \) to fully satisfy the equivalence.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Euler's theorem and its applications
  • Familiarity with the Chinese Remainder Theorem (CRT)
  • Knowledge of the properties of co-prime numbers
  • Basic concepts of modular arithmetic
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of Euler's theorem in number theory
  • Explore the Chinese Remainder Theorem and its applications in modular arithmetic
  • Investigate the properties of the totient function \( \phi(n) \)
  • Learn about advanced topics in modular exponentiation and its proofs
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, number theorists, and students studying modular arithmetic and co-prime properties, particularly those interested in proofs involving Euler's theorem and the Chinese Remainder Theorem.

Poirot1
Messages
243
Reaction score
0
Let n =xy be a positive integer where x,y>2 are co-prime. Show that if a is co-prime to n, then $a^{\frac{\phi(n)}{2}}=1$ mod(n)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Re: co-prime challenge

$$a^{\frac{\varphi{(n)}}{2}} \equiv b \pmod{n} ~ ~ ~ ~ \iff ~ ~ ~ ~ a^{\frac{\varphi{(n)}}{2}} \equiv b \pmod{x} ~ ~ ~ ~ \iff ~ ~ ~ ~ a^{\varphi{(x)} \frac{\varphi{(y)}}{2}} \equiv b \pmod{x} ~ ~ ~ ~ \implies ~ ~ ~ ~ b = 1$$
Explanations and justifications below:Step 1: Apply the CRT, since $n = xy$.
Step 2: Definition of the totient function, and $\gcd{(x, y)} = 1$.
Step 3: Recall $\varphi{(y)}$ is even as $y > 2$. Use Euler's Theorem as $\gcd{(a, x)} = 1$.

It occurs to me I've been using the parity property of $\varphi$ an inordinate number of times in the past week ;)​
 
Last edited:
Re: co-prime challenge

Bacterius said:
$$a^{\frac{\varphi{(n)}}{2}} \equiv b \pmod{n} ~ ~ ~ ~ \iff ~ ~ ~ ~ a^{\frac{\varphi{(n)}}{2}} \equiv b \pmod{x} ~ ~ ~ ~ \iff ~ ~ ~ ~ a^{\varphi{(x)} \frac{\varphi{(y)}}{2}} \equiv b \pmod{x} ~ ~ ~ ~ \implies ~ ~ ~ ~ b = 1$$
Explanations and justifications below:Step 1: Apply the CRT, since $n = xy$.
Step 2: Definition of the totient function, and $\gcd{(x, y)} = 1$.
Step 3: Recall $\varphi{(y)}$ is even as $y > 2$. Use Euler's Theorem as $\gcd{(a, x)} = 1$.

It occurs to me I've been using the parity property of $\varphi$ an inordinate number of times in the past week ;)​

Your method is better than mine. But in step 1, wouldn't the CRT be applicable if n and x were co-prime? As it is, the -> direction is clear, but how do you get the <- drection in step 1?
 
Re: co-prime challenge

Poirot said:
Your method is better than mine. But in step 1, wouldn't the CRT be applicable if n and x were co-prime? As it is, the -> direction is clear, but how do you get the <- drection in step 1?

Yes, that is a good point. What is missing is that the step has to follow for both $x$ and $y$ for the equivalence to be fully satisfied (the argument is valid for both factors, so it does hold). Good catch! I guess one could slip a WLOG in there somewhere..​
 
Re: co-prime challenge

By euler's theorem, $a^{\phi(n)}=1$ mod (n). Since n>2, phi(n) is even so that

$a^{{\frac{\phi(n)}{2}}^2}=1$ mod(n)

Thus, $|a^{\frac{\phi(n)}{2}}|=1$ mod(n)

Towards a contradiction, assume $a^{\frac{\phi(n)}{2}}=-1$ mod(n)

-> $a^{\frac{\phi(x)\phi(y)}{2}}=-1$ mod(x) using the multiplicative property of phi and the fact that any multiple of n is a multiple of x also.

since y>2, phi(y) is even so we get:

$a^{{\phi(x)}^{\frac{\phi(y)}{2}}}=-1$ mod(x). But (a,x)=1 so euler's theorem gives $a^{\phi(x)}=1$ mod(x). Also x>2 so 1 is not congruent to -1 mod(x). Therefore a contradiction has been established.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K