Why Fermat's little theorem not working here

  • Thread starter Thread starter 22990atinesh
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Modulus Theorem
AI Thread Summary
Fermat's Little Theorem applies only when P is prime, which is why it fails in the case of 2^133 mod 133, since 133 is not prime (it factors into 19 and 7). The correct calculation shows that 2^133 mod 133 equals 128, not 2, as initially concluded. The discussion highlights confusion around applying the theorem and emphasizes the need for clarity in calculations. An alternative method involving modular arithmetic is suggested, but it may become complex. Understanding the conditions under which Fermat's theorem is valid is crucial for solving such problems correctly.
22990atinesh
Messages
143
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


Fermats little theorem states that

##a^{P-1} \mod P = 1 \mid ## a is coprime to P
Now I'm trying to solve this equation with the help of above theorem, But I'm ending up with wrong result

##2^{133} \mod 133##

Homework Equations


##a^{P-1} \mod P = 1##
##(A \times B) \mod n = [(A \mod n) \times (B \mod n)] \mod n##

The Attempt at a Solution


##2^{133} \mod 133##
##= 2^{132+1} \mod 133##
##= 2^{132} \times 2 \mod 133##
##= [2^{132} \mod 133] \times [2 \mod 133]##
##\because (A \times B) \mod n = [(A \mod n) \times (B \mod n)] \mod n##
##= 1 \times 2 = 2##

But the correct ans is ##2^{133} \mod 133 = 128##
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Because 133=19 \times 7!
Actually I don't see any step that you are allowed to use the theorem in!
Your calculation aren't clear too!
 
Fermat's little theorem holds only if ##P## is prime.

Edit: Scooped by Shyan. :oops:
 
Sorry little mistake

##2^{133} \mod 133##
##= 2^{18 \times 7 + 7} \mod {19 \times 7}##
##= 2^{18 \times 7} \times 2^7 \mod {19 \times 7}##

Now how can we solve it
 
2133=(27)19=12819. p = 19, prime, and 128 is not divisible with 19. Apply Fermat's Little Theorem to a=128 and p=19.
 
@ehlid @Shayn
Actually I was watching an Online lecture, In it the teacher uses the following concept to solve the above problem

Suppose ##K \mod (A \times B) = R##

##K \mod A = r_1 \implies K = A \times x + r_1##
##K \mod B = r_2 \implies K = B \times y + r_2##

Then "R should be in ##A \times x + r_1## and ##B \times y + r_2## form". This statement I didn't understand
 
If ##K = Ax+r_1## and ##K =By+r_2##, Then look at A mod y=C and B mod x=D.
Then ## K=myx+Cx+r_1=nxy+Dy+r_2 ##
Thus ##K \mod xy = Cx+r_1=Dy+r_2##.
An example might be:
32 = 2 mod 3 and 32 = 0 mod 2.
Let 2=x, 3=y, r_1 =0, r_2 = 2, A= 16, B =10.
A mod y = 16 mod 3 = 1 =C.
B mod x = 10 mod 2 = 0 = D.
So 32 mod (2*3) = Cx+r_1=1*2+0=2 and =Dy+r_2=0*3+2=2.
This method could get ugly fast and is not as efficient as other methods that make use of cycles.
 
Back
Top