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.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

$$

\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 Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Lemma used to prove Von Staudt's Theorem

Loading...

Similar Threads - Lemma used prove | Date |
---|---|

A Last Gauss Lemma Section II | Feb 4, 2018 |

I Proving a lemma on decomposition of V to T-cyclic subspace | Mar 16, 2017 |

I Multiplication Maps on Algebras ... Bresar, Lemma 1.25 ... | Dec 5, 2016 |

I Bresar, Lemma 1.3 - Real Quaternions ... Division Algebras | Nov 20, 2016 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**