Solving Linear Congruence: 12x \equiv 1(mod5)

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Ed Aboud
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Linear
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around solving the linear congruence equation 12x ≡ 1 (mod 5). Participants explore different methods and reasoning for arriving at a solution, including the use of Euclid's Algorithm and properties of modular arithmetic.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Technical explanation, Debate/contested, Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a solution using Euclid's Algorithm and arrives at x = 5, questioning the validity of this approach.
  • Another participant suggests that the original equation can be simplified to 2x ≡ 1 (mod 5) by reducing 12 modulo 5, leading to the same solution x ≡ 3 (mod 5).
  • A third participant seeks clarification on the equivalence of the two expressions and questions the validity of reducing the coefficient in the congruence.
  • A fourth participant confirms that 12 ≡ 2 (mod 5) and implies that reduction is acceptable.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the validity of reducing the coefficient in the congruence and whether the initial approach is correct. There is no consensus on the correctness of the first method presented.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about the rules of modular arithmetic, particularly regarding division and reduction of coefficients. The discussion does not resolve these uncertainties.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for individuals interested in modular arithmetic, particularly those looking to understand different methods for solving linear congruences and the implications of reducing coefficients.

Ed Aboud
Messages
200
Reaction score
0
Hi all.

Can someone please tell me what is going wrong here.

Solve

[tex]12x \equiv 1(mod5)[/tex]


[tex]gcd(12,5) = 1[/tex]

By Euclid's Algorithm =>

[tex]1 = 5.5 - 2.12[/tex]

So r is 5 in this case.
[tex]x = r ( \frac{b}{d} )[/tex]

Where b is 1 and d = gcd(12,5) = 1
[tex]x = 5 ( \frac{1}{1} )[/tex]

[tex]x = 5[/tex]

Ok fair enough but then I solve the congruence using

[tex]x \equiv b a^\phi^(^m^)^-^1 (mod m)[/tex]

[tex]x \equiv (1) 12^3 (mod5)[/tex]

[tex]x \equiv 3 (mod 5 )[/tex]

I know this is the correct solution but what did I do wrong in the other one.

Thanks for the help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
don't know if this is valid, but isn't the first expression equivalent to [tex] 2x \equiv 1(mod5) [/tex]
then 2x = "6" mod 5

[tex]x\equiv 3(mod5)[/tex]
yes i know that one is not supposed to do division, but modulus is prime, and there is a multiplicative inverse that i multiplied by (3)
 
Ok I'm not very good at this, but why is the first one equivalent to [tex]2x \equiv 1(mod5)[/tex].

Did you reduce the 12 (mod 5) ? Are you able to do that?
 
I think so as [tex]12\equiv 2(mod5)[/tex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K