Lemma used to prove Von Staudt's Theorem

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter DeadOriginal
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Theorem
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
1 reply · 2K views
DeadOriginal
Messages
274
Reaction score
2
I am reading Hardy's Intro to the Theory of Numbers and I am currently trying to work through the proof of Von Staudt's Theorem. Hardy first proves the following lemma.
$$
\sum\limits_{1}^{p-1}m^{k}\equiv -\epsilon_{k}(p) (\mod p).
$$
Proof: If ##(p-1)|k## then ##m^{k}\equiv 1## by Fermat's Theorem and
$$
\sum m^{k}\equiv p-1\equiv -1\equiv -\epsilon_{k}(p) (\mod p).
$$
If ##(p-1)\not|k## and ##g## is a primitive root of ##p## then ##g^{k}\not\equiv 1 (\mod p)##.

Everything makes sense so far, but then Hardy goes on to say:

The sets ##g,2g,...,(p-1)g## and ##1,2,...,p-1## are equivalent (mod p).

I don't see how these two sets are equivalent. I believe these two sets are residues but I am very confused about what residues are in general and so I cannot understand what Hardy means when he says that the two sets are equivalent. Any help to understand the last statement that Hardy makes or just any conversation about residues in general to help me understand them better would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In case anyone else ever has this problem, I was able to figure out why the sets are equivalent. By a previous theorem about 100 pages or so before this lemma, Hardy proved that if (g,p)=1 and 1,2,...,p-1 are a set of incongruent residues mod p then g,2g,...,g(p-1) is also such a set.

I would still love to talk about anything that has to do with number theory and residues if anybody is interested.