How Does Modular Arithmetic Prove Divisibility by 17 in Number Theory?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Gravitational
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Number theory Theory
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the proof of divisibility by 17 for the expressions 2x + 3y and 9x + 5y, exploring the conditions under which one expression being divisible by 17 implies the other is also divisible by 17. The scope includes mathematical reasoning and modular arithmetic concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the validity of the operations used in the proof, particularly the multiplication by 13 and 4, seeking clarification on the rationale behind these choices.
  • Others explain that the rules of divisibility allow for multiplication by constants, but the specific choice of numbers is not immediately clear to everyone.
  • A participant suggests that trial and error could lead to discovering the appropriate multipliers, while another emphasizes the importance of understanding modulo arithmetic to grasp the reasoning behind the proof.
  • Some participants express understanding of the multiplication by 13 but struggle with the significance of multiplying by 4, indicating a need for further clarification on this step.
  • One participant provides an alternative proof, arguing that it is clearer and emphasizes the use of modular operations to demonstrate the divisibility condition.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally express confusion about the proof's steps and the rationale behind certain multiplications, indicating a lack of consensus on the clarity and correctness of the original solution. Multiple views on the necessity of modular arithmetic and the effectiveness of different proof methods are present.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that understanding the proof may depend on familiarity with modular arithmetic, which not all contributors possess. The discussion highlights the complexity of the proof and the various interpretations of the operations involved.

Gravitational
Messages
29
Reaction score
0
Let x and y be integers. Prove that 2x + 3y is divisible
by 17 iff 9x + 5y is divisible by 17.
Solution. 17 | (2x + 3y) ⇒ 17 | [13(2x + 3y)], or 17 | (26x + 39y) ⇒
17 | (9x + 5y), and conversely, 17 | (9x + 5y) ⇒ 17 | [4(9x + 5y)], or
17 | (36x + 20y) ⇒ 17 | (2x + 3y)

Could someone please help me understand this solution. I do not understand it at all. What basis do they have for doing such operations? The solution just doesn't make sense
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Which part don't you understand??

The only two rules they used were

[tex]n\vert m~\Rightarrow~n\vert mk[/tex]
and
[tex]n\vert m,~n\vert k~\Rightarrow~n\vert (m+k)[/tex]
 
Why do they multiply 2x+3y by 13? and why do they multiply 9x+5y by 4? why not some other numbers?
 
Gravitational said:
Why do they multiply 2x+3y by 13? and why do they multiply 9x+5y by 4? why not some other numbers?
So they can get the desired answer. If you use other numbers, you'll get other equivalent statements.

How did they know that would give the desired answer? Trial and error would work. Or, you could try and write down an equation that says "If I multiply by n, then the answer I get is the one I want".
Gravitational said:
Could someone please help me understand this solution. I do not understand it at all. What basis do they have for doing such operations? The solution just doesn't make sense
You're asking the wrong question, it seems. You don't seem to have meant "I don't understand this solution!" -- you seem to have meant "How could I have come up with this solution myself?"
 
Do you know modulo arithmetic?
 
micromass said:
Do you know modulo arithmetic?

no, but i don't think modulo arithmetic is necessary in this problem
 
I understand why they multiplied by 13, but i don't see the significance in multiplying by 4
 
Gravitational said:
no, but i don't think modulo arithmetic is necessary in this problem

It's not necessary in understanding the solution. But it's necessary in understanding why they did what they did.
 
Gravitational said:
I understand why they multiplied by 13, but i don't see the significance in multiplying by 4

If you understand the first part, then you should understand the logic of the second part. Both parts are required to show the "if and only if" condition. Basically, they used multiplication by 4 since 4*9 = 17*2 plus 2 and that is the way to reduce the 9x to 2x mod 17. Because of the iff part, taking care of the x variable also takes care of the y variable.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
2x + 3y is divisible by 17, there is an integer k such that (2x + 3y)/17 = k <=> 2x + 3y = 17k. Multiply both sides by 13
13(2x + 3y) = 13 * 17k
<=>
26x + 39y = 13 * 17k
<=>
9x + 5y + (17x + 34y) = 13 * 17k
<=> (moving over the thing in the parantheses to the right-hand side and factoring out 17
9x + 5y = 13 * 17k - (17x + 34y) = 13 * 17k - 17(x + 2y) = 17(13k - (x + 2y))

Thus 9x + 5y is divisible by 17.

I actually think this proof is better
 
  • #11
Gravitational said:
2x + 3y is divisible by 17, there is an integer k such that (2x + 3y)/17 = k <=> 2x + 3y = 17k. Multiply both sides by 13
13(2x + 3y) = 13 * 17k
<=>
26x + 39y = 13 * 17k
<=>
9x + 5y + (17x + 34y) = 13 * 17k
<=> (moving over the thing in the parantheses to the right-hand side and factoring out 17
9x + 5y = 13 * 17k - (17x + 34y) = 13 * 17k - 17(x + 2y) = 17(13k - (x + 2y))

Thus 9x + 5y is divisible by 17.

I actually think this proof is better

solution*
 
  • #12
Gravitational said:
2x + 3y is divisible by 17, there is an integer k such that (2x + 3y)/17 = k <=> 2x + 3y = 17k. Multiply both sides by 13
13(2x + 3y) = 13 * 17k
<=>
26x + 39y = 13 * 17k
<=>
9x + 5y + (17x + 34y) = 13 * 17k
<=> (moving over the thing in the parantheses to the right-hand side and factoring out 17
9x + 5y = 13 * 17k - (17x + 34y) = 13 * 17k - 17(x + 2y) = 17(13k - (x + 2y))

Thus 9x + 5y is divisible by 17.

I actually think this proof is better

More powerful if you use the Mod operations. In Mod 17, multiples of 17 == 0.

2x + 3y == 0 Mod 17
26x + 39y == 13* 0 Mod 17
9x + x*0 + 5y + y*0 == 13*0 Mod 17
9x + 5y == 0 Mod 17

I other words 9x+ 5y is divisible by 17 if 2x + 3y is divisible by 17
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K