Prove that p-1 divides the order of a modulo p

  • Level: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter SrEstroncio
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof Theorem
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
3 replies · 3K views
SrEstroncio
Messages
60
Reaction score
0
Hello everyone, I have been trying to teach myself number theory and I am stuck trying to prove a (I am sure) very easy to prove theorem related to that of Fermat's.

The theorem I am to prove states:

Let [tex]e[/tex] be the lowest number (natural) such that [tex]a^e \equiv 1 (\bmod \ p)[/tex] for [tex]p[/tex] prime such that [tex]p[/tex] does not divide [tex]a[/tex]. Prove that [tex]p-1[/tex] is a multiple of [tex]e[/tex].

This theorem came after the proof of Fermat's Theorem, which I will also write for the sake of completeness.

Let [tex]p[/tex] be a prime and let [tex]a[/tex] be an integer such that [tex]p[/tex] does not divide [tex]a[/tex] it follows that:
[tex]a^{p-1} \equiv 1 (\bmod \ p)[/tex]

The book I am reading from (What is mathemathics? by Richard Courant and Herbert Robbins) suggests that I use the fact that [tex]a^{p-1} \equiv a^e \equiv 1 (\bmod \ p)[/tex] and that I divide [tex]p-1[/tex] by [tex]e[/tex] to get [tex]p-1 = ke + r[/tex]
where r is the residue.

I've given it some thought but I kinda blow at math and I've done no useful advances, I was wondering if anyone could provide some more more insight.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Given that
[tex]a^{p-1} = a^{ke+r} \equiv a^e \equiv 1 \pmod p[/tex]
you are to prove that r=0. Consider that
[tex]a^{ke+r} = a^{ke} a^r = (a^{e})^k a^r[/tex]
(now, doing some more work, where can you get at?)
and remember that r<e.
 
Okay, here's what I've thought:

We know that
[tex]a^{p-1} = a^{ke+r} = (a^e)^k a^r \equiv a^e \equiv 1 (\bmod \ p)[/tex]
We also know that
[tex]a^e \equiv 1 (\bmod \ p)[/tex],
we can infer from this that [tex] (a^e)^n \equiv 1(\bmod p)[/tex] for any integer n, thus the only way for
[tex](a^e)^k a^r \equiv a^e \equiv 1 (\bmod \ p)[/tex]
to be true is to have
[tex]a^r \equiv 1 (\bmod \ p)[/tex]
which can only happen if [tex]r=0[/tex] since we were supposing [tex]e[/tex] was the lowest power of [tex]a[/tex] that was congruent to 1 modulo [tex]p[/tex].
So we conclude that
[tex]p-1 = ke + r = ke + 0 = ke[/tex] and thus e must be a factor of [tex]p-1[/tex].

Tell me if I screwed up somewhere along the way.