What Is the Smallest N That Cannot Be Eliminated Using Modular Arithmetic?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter PhysicForumz
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Interesting Puzzle
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on determining the smallest integer N that cannot be eliminated using modular arithmetic for various values of p. For p=2, the minimum N is 2, while for p=3, the minimum N is 4. The challenge lies in generalizing this to any prime p, such as p=41 or p=211. Participants suggest creating a program to explore combinations of x values to eliminate N values effectively.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of modular arithmetic and its properties
  • Familiarity with prime numbers and their significance in modular systems
  • Basic programming skills for algorithm implementation
  • Knowledge of set theory and unions in mathematical contexts
NEXT STEPS
  • Research algorithms for generating combinations in modular arithmetic
  • Explore the concept of prime number distributions and their applications
  • Learn about computational number theory techniques for solving modular problems
  • Investigate existing programs or libraries that handle modular arithmetic efficiently
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, computer scientists, and programmers interested in number theory, particularly those working on problems involving modular arithmetic and prime numbers.

PhysicForumz
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
A natural integer N can be written as x mod p, for instance:

N... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

p=2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2

p=3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3

p=5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2

p=7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5

Etc.

The puzzle is quite difficult to state in this format but I'll have a go:

You choose any value x from each row of mod p (up to the maximum value of p, in the above case 7) and eliminate them. You have to find the minumum number N where it is impossible to eliminate all values of N.

Examples:

For p=2, the minimum N is 2. This is because eliminating any value of x (1 or 2), you will always have one remaining.

N... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

p=2 1 2For p=3.

N... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

p=2 1 2 1

p=3 1 2 3

Having a minimum of N=3 would not work: if you chose x=1 in the p=2 row, you'd eliminate N=1 and N=3. Then you eliminate x=2 in the p=3 row and you eliminate them all.

N... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

p=2 1 2 1 2

p=3 1 2 3 1

Having a minimum of N=4 would work however. There is no combination of x you could use to eliminate all values of N. For instance, with x=1 in the p=2 row, you'd eliminate N=1 and N=3. Then whether you choose x=2 or x=1 on the p=3 row, you'd have one left. I.e N=4

For p=5.

N... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

p=2 1 2 1 2 1 2

p=3 1 2 3 1 2 3

p=5 1 2 3 4 5 1

I'll leave this to you, but you could try N=6. Try some combinations of x on each row. Is it possible to eliminate every value of N with N=6? (Answer is no :p)

The question is: how do you generalise this up to any p? E.g. how would you find out the minimum N needed when p = 41? What about when p = 211? Etc.

I've had a go, but it gets very tricky after a while trying to eliminate every value of N and finding all the combinations of x to use! I've started to make a program to do this for higher values of p!

Tell me if you need any clarifications / I haven't explained the problem properly
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
To rephrase the question, you're asking what is the largest N such that
\{1,...,N-1\} \subseteq \bigcup_{j=1}^k(r_j+p_j\mathbb{Z}) for some values r_j and where p_j is the jth prime number?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 68 ·
3
Replies
68
Views
12K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K