How can I solve [x]^13 + 7*[x] + 5 = 0 in ring 91 efficiently?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Werg22
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Approach
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around solving the equation [x]^13 + 7*[x] + 5 = 0 in the context of ring 91, exploring methods for efficient resolution, including modular arithmetic and the Chinese Remainder Theorem.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses difficulty in solving the equation as a Diophantine equation and considers brute force as inconvenient.
  • Another participant suggests interpreting ring 91 as modulo 91 and proposes multiplying the equation by 13 to simplify it.
  • A later reply indicates that multiplying by 13 leads to a new equation that can be analyzed modulo 7 and 13, referencing Fermat's Little Theorem as a useful tool.
  • One participant questions the reasoning behind x^13 = x mod 7 and later resolves their confusion independently.
  • Another participant introduces the Chinese Remainder Theorem as a method to combine solutions from the mod 7 and mod 13 cases, applying Fermat's Little Theorem to derive a solution modulo 13.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the approach of using modular arithmetic and the Chinese Remainder Theorem, but there are varying levels of understanding and confidence in the underlying theory.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about the theoretical aspects of the problem, particularly regarding the application of Fermat's Little Theorem and the implications of working in a composite modulus.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in modular arithmetic, Diophantine equations, and number theory may find the discussion relevant.

Werg22
Messages
1,431
Reaction score
1
I've got to solve this:

[x]^13 + 7*[x] + 5 = 0 in ring 91.

I've tried solving for [x]^13 and [x] as variables in a Diophante equation but I wasn't able to go anywhere with that. I could try brute force by trying every value for [x] from 0 to 90 but that would just be inconvenient. What should I do?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What's ring 91? Do you mean modulo 91? If so, notice that 91=13*7. So to start things off, multiply your equation by 13 to get rid of the [x] term. Then consider things mod 13 and mod 7.
 
I admit I am quite shaky with the theory involved, mind giving a bit more details?
 
If you multiply by 13, you're going to get
0 = 13[x]^13 + 91[x] + 65 = 13[x]^13 - 26 (mod 91)

If the expression the RHS is divisible by 91, then it's divisible by 7 and 13. Conversely, if it's divisible by both 7 and 13, then it's divisible by 91. But it's clearly divisible by 13, so we really only need to consider 13[x]^13 = 26 (mod 7). Fermat's little theorem can be helpful here.

Generally working modulo a prime is easier than modulo a composite.
 
Thanks allot, I'll see how it develops.
 
A quick question why does x^13 = x mod 7? I can't quite pin down the reason; is that a case where Fermat's little theorem comes in hand?

Edit: Nevermind, figured it out.
 
Last edited:
What you need here is, as mentioned, 91=7*13. Then you can consider the Chinese Remainder Theorem which explains that we can solve this problem for both 7 and 13 and then combine the result. The other matter is Fermat's Little theorem, which says that for prime p, X^p ==x Mod p, that is, X^(p-1)==1 Mod p.

So Mod 13, X^13 ==X. This gives x+7x+5 ==0 Mod 13, or 8x==-5==8 Mod 13. Thus we have X==1 Mod 13. The numbers that solve that are of the form 1+13K = 1, 14, 27,...

You can then proceed in the same manner with the equation Mod 7...
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K