Proving the Congruence of n^2 Mod 7: A Modular Problem in Number Theory

  • Thread starter Thread starter bonfire09
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on proving that for every integer n, n² is congruent to exactly one of the values 0, 2, or 4 modulo 7. Participants emphasize that it suffices to test n = 0, 1, 2, and 3, as higher values repeat results due to the properties of modular arithmetic. The proof is established through specific cases, demonstrating that n² mod 7 yields the results: 0, 1, 4, and 2 for n = 0, 1, 2, and 3 respectively. The conversation highlights the importance of understanding modular equivalences and the reduction of calculations by recognizing symmetry in modular classes.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of modular arithmetic
  • Familiarity with congruences and equivalence classes
  • Basic knowledge of number theory
  • Ability to perform calculations with integers modulo n
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of modular arithmetic in depth
  • Learn about equivalence relations and their applications in number theory
  • Explore the concept of quadratic residues modulo n
  • Investigate proofs involving modular congruences and their implications
USEFUL FOR

Students of number theory, mathematicians interested in modular arithmetic, and anyone looking to enhance their understanding of congruences and proofs in mathematics.

bonfire09
Messages
247
Reaction score
0
I have to prove "For every integer n, n^2 is congruent to exactly one 0,2,or 4mod 7? I don't even know where to start? Apparently its a problem that has 6 other problems to it too meaning a-f and my professor assigned us the last one.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
bonfire09 said:
I have to prove "For every integer n, n^2 is congruent to exactly one 0,2,or 4mod 7? I don't even know where to start? Apparently its a problem that has 6 other problems to it too meaning a-f and my professor assigned us the last one.

Hint: You don't have to do it for every n; just for n = 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. Why? And if you think about it a little, you really only need to test n = 0, 1, 2, and 3. Why?
 
Hi
Any integer is written as 7m+k where k=0,1,2,3,4,5,6. mod((7m+k)^2) = mod(k^2) for modulus 7.
You can get possible cases in seven calculations. As SteveL27 says you can reduce number of calculations half with attention that mod((7m+k)^2)=mod((7m-k)^2)=mod({7(m-1)+(7-k)}^2)=mod((7-k)^2)=mod(k^2)

In similar ways
For modulus 2, Ans {0,1}
For modulus 3, Ans {0,1}
For modulus 4, Ans {0,1}
For modulus 5, Ans {0,1,4}
For modulus 6, Ans {0,1,3,4}
For modulus 7, Ans {0,1,2,4}
For modulus 8, Ans {0,1,2,3,4}
For modulus 10, Ans {0,1,4,5,6,9}

Regards.
 
Last edited:
thanks for the explanation! I think I get what you guys say. I'm going to figure it out and see how far I can get.
 
Hint: You don't have to do it for every n; just for n = 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. Why? And if you think about it a little, you really only need to test n = 0, 1, 2, and 3. Why?

Oh that's because 4 and 6 are multiples of 2 and 3 and 5 is basically 2(2)+1.
 
bonfire09 said:
Oh that's because 4 and 6 are multiples of 2 and 3 and 5 is basically 2(2)+1.

What I had in mind was that 4 = -3 (mod 7) so you don't have to test 4 since you're squaring.

4^2 is already the same as (-3)^2 = 3^2. So you only need to check 3 but not 4. Likewise you don't have to check 5 or 6.
 
the whole point of modular arithmetic is that every specific problem can be done in a finite amount of time by anyone no matter how clueless, just by trying all the cases.

your predicament suggests that you lack the basic idea. hopefully it is getting clearer with this example.
 
I proved it by using 4 cases where n=0,n=1,n=2, and n=3. And showed that each case was congruent to exactly one thing. As you use 4,5,6... it repeats so I chose not to show those in my proof.
 
bonfire09 said:
I proved it by using 4 cases where n=0,n=1,n=2, and n=3. And showed that each case was congruent to exactly one thing. As you use 4,5,6... it repeats so I chose not to show those in my proof.
I don't see the work where you showed or gave an explanation why it repeats for 4,5,6?
 
  • #10
@bonfire09:
Depending on the situation, you may want to show that the cases repeat. For example, showing these 3 computations should be satisfactory (though if this is for an introductory class, it might be prudent to be more rigorous than this):

0^2 mod 7 = 0
1^2 mod 7 = 1 = 6^2 mod 7
2^2 mod 7 = 4 = 5^2 mod 7
3^2 mod 7 = 2 = 4^2 mod 7

Also, in response to your very first post, 1^2 is not in {0,2,4} mod 7 :P

(I think you made a typo)
 
  • #11
Eval said:
@bonfire09:
Depending on the situation, you may want to show that the cases repeat. For example, showing these 3 computations should be satisfactory (though if this is for an introductory class, it might be prudent to be more rigorous than this):

0^2 mod 7 = 0
1^2 mod 7 = 1 = 6^2 mod 7
2^2 mod 7 = 4 = 5^2 mod 7
3^2 mod 7 = 2 = 4^2 mod 7

Also, in response to your very first post, 1^2 is not in {0,2,4} mod 7 :P

(I think you made a typo)
No, Bonfire wrote 0, 1, 4, 2 as "one, 0, 4, 2". In my post, I tried to say that any proof must be complete,i.e. you can't merely ignore the 4,5,6.
 
  • #12
I know, that was what I was saying. I was responding to him, not you, sorry :/

Also, I read that as a different syntax. I thought he was saying "congruent to exactly one 0,2,or 4mod 7" meaning that it was one of the values in the list {0,2,4}

EDIT: This is one of those cases where you could get away with "WLOG" (Without Loss of Generality), depending on the level at which you are writing the proof.
 
  • #13
Eval said:
I know, that was what I was saying. I was responding to him, not you, sorry :/

Also, I read that as a different syntax. I thought he was saying "congruent to exactly one 0,2,or 4mod 7" meaning that it was one of the values in the list {0,2,4}

EDIT: This is one of those cases where you could get away with "WLOG" (Without Loss of Generality), depending on the level at which you are writing the proof.
Yeah, it could be read either way, which is how some professors try to confuse things to make the student think. As for your edit, I disagree.
 
  • #14
Oh yeah here is my proof:
Case:1 let n=0
Since n=0 then n^2=0. Hence 0 is congruent to 0mod 7.
Case 2:let n=1
Since n=1 then n^2=1. Hence 1 is congruent to 1mod7.
Case 3 let n=2
Since n=2 then n^2=4. Hence 4 is congruent to 4mod7.
Case 4 let n=3
Since n=3 then n^2=9. Hence 9 is congruent to 2mod7.
This is the rundown of my proof. There is not much to assume here except that n is an integer. And prove that each integer n^2 is congruent to exactly one of the four cases.
 
Last edited:
  • #15
bonfire09 said:
Oh yeah here is my proof:
Case:1 let n=0
Since n=0 then n^2=0. Hence 0 is congruent to 0mod 7.
Case 2:let n=1
Since n=1 then n^2=1. Hence 1 is congruent to 1mod7.
Case 3 let n=2
Since n=2 then n^2=4. Hence 4 is congruent to 4mod7.
Case 4 let n=3
Since n=3 then n^2=9. Hence 9 is congruent to 2mod7.
This is the rundown of my proof. There is not much to assume here except that n is an integer. And prove that each integer n^2 is congruent to exactly one of the four cases.

What happens if n = 5793459834895479437?
 
  • #16
Dang! Oh i forgot to represent the integer n as an arbitrary value meaning that n=7m, 7m+1,7m+2,etc
Where m is an integer.
 
  • #17
bonfire09 said:
Oh yeah here is my proof:
Case:1 let n=0
Since n=0 then n^2=0. Hence 0 is congruent to 0mod 7.
Case 2:let n=1
Since n=1 then n^2=1. Hence 1 is congruent to 1mod7.
Case 3 let n=2
Since n=2 then n^2=4. Hence 4 is congruent to 4mod7.
Case 4 let n=3
Since n=3 then n^2=9. Hence 9 is congruent to 2mod7.
This is the rundown of my proof. There is not much to assume here except that n is an integer. And prove that each integer n^2 is congruent to exactly one of the four cases.
How does your proof address the question of whether n = 7m + 4 , 7m +5 and 7m +6 give one of the same values for n = 0 to 3?
 
  • #18
bonfire09 said:
Dang! Oh i forgot to represent the integer n as an arbitrary value meaning that n=7m, 7m+1,7m+2,etc
Where m is an integer.
But the 4 cases you gave even if taken mod 7 do not address the case mentioned by SteveL27 since that is the case where n = 7m + 5, which is not one of the four cases you did.

Actually you could had broken it down into one of the following 4 cases:

n = 7m
n = 7m +/- 1
n = 7m +/- 2
n = 7m +/- 3
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K