MHB Show that it's a solution and solve the primarities...

  • Thread starter Thread starter evinda
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on proving that \( a^{p-2}b \) and \( a^{\phi(n)-1}b \) are solutions to the congruences \( ax \equiv b \pmod{p} \) and \( ax \equiv b \pmod{n} \) respectively, using Fermat's and Euler's theorems. The user initially provides solutions for specific modular equations but is informed that they made two calculation errors. The correct solutions for the equations \( 3x \equiv 17 \pmod{29} \) and \( 10x \equiv 21 \pmod{49} \) are clarified as \( x \equiv 2 \pmod{29} \) and \( x \equiv 7 \pmod{49} \). The conversation highlights the importance of accurate calculations in modular arithmetic. Overall, the user demonstrates a solid understanding of the underlying theorems but needs to correct specific computational mistakes.
evinda
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,741
Reaction score
0
Hello! (Wave)

I am looking at the following exercise:

  • Let $p$ a prime and $p \nmid a$,prove that $a^{p-2}b$ is a solution of $\displaystyle{ax \equiv b \pmod p}$
    Solve: $2x \equiv 1 \pmod{31} \\ 3x \equiv 17 \pmod{29}$
  • If $(a,n)=1$,prove that $a^{\phi(n)-1}b$ is a solution of $\displaystyle{ax \equiv b \pmod n}$
    Solve: $3x \equiv 5 \pmod{26} \\ 10x \equiv 21 \pmod{49}$

That'a what I have tried:


  • $$(a,p)=1$$
    So,from Fermat's theorem:

    $$a^{p-1} \equiv 1 \pmod p \Rightarrow a \cdot a^{p-2}b \equiv b \pmod p$$

    $$\text{So, } a^{p-2}b \text{ is a solution of } ax \equiv b \pmod p$$

    $$2x \equiv 1 \pmod {31}$$
    $$\text{As } (2,31)=1,\text{ there is exactly one solution,and according to the exercise,it is this one: } 2^{31-2}=2^{29}$$
    $$x \equiv 2^{29}\pmod {31} \Rightarrow x \equiv 16 \pmod{31}$$$$3x \equiv 17 \pmod{29}, (3,17)=1, \text{ so there is exactly one solution,and according to the exercise,it is this one: } 3^{29-2} \cdot 17$$
    $$x \equiv 3^{29-2} \cdot 17 \pmod{19} \Rightarrow x \equiv 12 \pmod{29}$$
  • $$(a,n)=1, \text{ so from Euler's theorem: } a^{\phi(n)} \equiv 1 \pmod n$$
    $$a \cdot a^{\phi(n)-1} \equiv 1 \pmod n \Rightarrow a \cdot b a^{\phi(n)-1} \equiv b \mod n$$

    $$So, b a^{\phi(n)-1} \text{ is a solution of } ax \equiv b \pmod n$$

    $$3x \equiv 5 \pmod{26} , (3,16=1), \text{ so the only solution is : } 3^{\phi(26)-1}5=3^{11} \cdot 5 \equiv 19 \pmod{26} $$

    $$10x \equiv 21 \pmod{49}, (10,49)=1, \text{ so the only solution is : } 10^{\phi(49)-1}21=10^{41} \cdot 21\equiv 10 \pmod{49}$$

Could you tell me if it is right or if I have done something wrong? (Thinking)
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Hi! (Smile)

Your reasoning is flawless! (Sun)

But... it appears you have made 2 calculation mistakes. (Worried)
 
I like Serena said:
Hi! (Smile)

Your reasoning is flawless! (Sun)
(Clapping)(Clapping)

I like Serena said:
But... it appears you have made 2 calculation mistakes. (Worried)

Oh yes , you are right!
At $3x \equiv 17 \pmod{29}$ the solution must be: $x \equiv 2 \pmod{29}$ and at $10x \equiv 21 \pmod{49}$,the solution must be $x \equiv 7 \mod{49}$.

Or am I wrong? (Thinking)
 
evinda said:
Oh yes , you are right!
At $3x \equiv 17 \pmod{29}$ the solution must be: $x \equiv 2 \pmod{29}$ and at $10x \equiv 21 \pmod{49}$,the solution must be $x \equiv 7 \mod{49}$.

Or am I wrong? (Thinking)

You found them! (Nod)

Well... I think still one of them is wrong. (Worried)
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top