Let $p$ be prime, and $n < p$. Then $ntimes i$ âhitsâ every residue class for $0 < i < p$. (Searching for clean proof)
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Intuitively, I'm trying to show that the first $p-1$ multiples of n give every possible remainder after division by p. Or equivalently,
$$ T = ; i in mathbbZ, ; 1 leq i < p $$
$$S = a ; $$
are equal.
Showing $T subseteq S$ is straightforward, but my proof for $ S subseteq T$ is two handwritten pages long and (even by my standards) convoluted.
This has the feel of well-known theorem, but I can't find it anywhere. Could someone either provide or link to a short/clean proof for the above?
elementary-number-theory
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Intuitively, I'm trying to show that the first $p-1$ multiples of n give every possible remainder after division by p. Or equivalently,
$$ T = ; i in mathbbZ, ; 1 leq i < p $$
$$S = a ; $$
are equal.
Showing $T subseteq S$ is straightforward, but my proof for $ S subseteq T$ is two handwritten pages long and (even by my standards) convoluted.
This has the feel of well-known theorem, but I can't find it anywhere. Could someone either provide or link to a short/clean proof for the above?
elementary-number-theory
This is a similar question to the one that I asked here
â Bill Wallis
2 days ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Intuitively, I'm trying to show that the first $p-1$ multiples of n give every possible remainder after division by p. Or equivalently,
$$ T = ; i in mathbbZ, ; 1 leq i < p $$
$$S = a ; $$
are equal.
Showing $T subseteq S$ is straightforward, but my proof for $ S subseteq T$ is two handwritten pages long and (even by my standards) convoluted.
This has the feel of well-known theorem, but I can't find it anywhere. Could someone either provide or link to a short/clean proof for the above?
elementary-number-theory
Intuitively, I'm trying to show that the first $p-1$ multiples of n give every possible remainder after division by p. Or equivalently,
$$ T = ; i in mathbbZ, ; 1 leq i < p $$
$$S = a ; $$
are equal.
Showing $T subseteq S$ is straightforward, but my proof for $ S subseteq T$ is two handwritten pages long and (even by my standards) convoluted.
This has the feel of well-known theorem, but I can't find it anywhere. Could someone either provide or link to a short/clean proof for the above?
elementary-number-theory
edited 2 days ago
pointguard0
520315
520315
asked 2 days ago
Noah Caplinger
84
84
This is a similar question to the one that I asked here
â Bill Wallis
2 days ago
add a comment |Â
This is a similar question to the one that I asked here
â Bill Wallis
2 days ago
This is a similar question to the one that I asked here
â Bill Wallis
2 days ago
This is a similar question to the one that I asked here
â Bill Wallis
2 days ago
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Suppose that two numbers fell into the same bin: $acdot nequiv bcdot npmod p$. Then $(acdot n-bcdot n)equiv 0bmod p$, so there's some number $c$ with $(a-b)cdot n=ccdot p$. Now, can you finish up from here? (This is where it's essential that $p$ is prime.)
Once you know that no two numbers fall into the same bin, then the rest is just an application of the pigeonhole principle: there are $p$ distinct equivalence classes of $acdot nbmod p$ for $0leq alt p$, and there are $p$ distinct representatives $langle brangle$ of those equivalence classes with $0leq blt p$, so the former must cover all the latter.
Just so I'm understanding fully: p divides c*p, so p also divides (a-b)*n. But n does not divide p (p is prime), so p divides (a-b), meaning a = b mod p. Is this correct?
â Noah Caplinger
2 days ago
Pretty close - $p$ divides $(a-b)cdot n$, so either $p|(a-b)$ or $p|n$, and the latter is impossible since $nlt p$.
â Steven Stadnicki
2 days ago
So why is it essential that p is prime?
â Noah Caplinger
2 days ago
Because $a|bcdot c$ doesn't necessarily imply $a|b$ or $a|c$ if $a$ isn't a prime; consider, e.g., $4|6cdot10$.
â Steven Stadnicki
2 days ago
Thanks for the help!
â Noah Caplinger
2 days ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
This follows from the fact that $n$ is invertible in the ring $mathbbZ_p$ so you can solve the equation
$$ni = y$$
as
$$i = n^-1y$$
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Suppose that two numbers fell into the same bin: $acdot nequiv bcdot npmod p$. Then $(acdot n-bcdot n)equiv 0bmod p$, so there's some number $c$ with $(a-b)cdot n=ccdot p$. Now, can you finish up from here? (This is where it's essential that $p$ is prime.)
Once you know that no two numbers fall into the same bin, then the rest is just an application of the pigeonhole principle: there are $p$ distinct equivalence classes of $acdot nbmod p$ for $0leq alt p$, and there are $p$ distinct representatives $langle brangle$ of those equivalence classes with $0leq blt p$, so the former must cover all the latter.
Just so I'm understanding fully: p divides c*p, so p also divides (a-b)*n. But n does not divide p (p is prime), so p divides (a-b), meaning a = b mod p. Is this correct?
â Noah Caplinger
2 days ago
Pretty close - $p$ divides $(a-b)cdot n$, so either $p|(a-b)$ or $p|n$, and the latter is impossible since $nlt p$.
â Steven Stadnicki
2 days ago
So why is it essential that p is prime?
â Noah Caplinger
2 days ago
Because $a|bcdot c$ doesn't necessarily imply $a|b$ or $a|c$ if $a$ isn't a prime; consider, e.g., $4|6cdot10$.
â Steven Stadnicki
2 days ago
Thanks for the help!
â Noah Caplinger
2 days ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Suppose that two numbers fell into the same bin: $acdot nequiv bcdot npmod p$. Then $(acdot n-bcdot n)equiv 0bmod p$, so there's some number $c$ with $(a-b)cdot n=ccdot p$. Now, can you finish up from here? (This is where it's essential that $p$ is prime.)
Once you know that no two numbers fall into the same bin, then the rest is just an application of the pigeonhole principle: there are $p$ distinct equivalence classes of $acdot nbmod p$ for $0leq alt p$, and there are $p$ distinct representatives $langle brangle$ of those equivalence classes with $0leq blt p$, so the former must cover all the latter.
Just so I'm understanding fully: p divides c*p, so p also divides (a-b)*n. But n does not divide p (p is prime), so p divides (a-b), meaning a = b mod p. Is this correct?
â Noah Caplinger
2 days ago
Pretty close - $p$ divides $(a-b)cdot n$, so either $p|(a-b)$ or $p|n$, and the latter is impossible since $nlt p$.
â Steven Stadnicki
2 days ago
So why is it essential that p is prime?
â Noah Caplinger
2 days ago
Because $a|bcdot c$ doesn't necessarily imply $a|b$ or $a|c$ if $a$ isn't a prime; consider, e.g., $4|6cdot10$.
â Steven Stadnicki
2 days ago
Thanks for the help!
â Noah Caplinger
2 days ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Suppose that two numbers fell into the same bin: $acdot nequiv bcdot npmod p$. Then $(acdot n-bcdot n)equiv 0bmod p$, so there's some number $c$ with $(a-b)cdot n=ccdot p$. Now, can you finish up from here? (This is where it's essential that $p$ is prime.)
Once you know that no two numbers fall into the same bin, then the rest is just an application of the pigeonhole principle: there are $p$ distinct equivalence classes of $acdot nbmod p$ for $0leq alt p$, and there are $p$ distinct representatives $langle brangle$ of those equivalence classes with $0leq blt p$, so the former must cover all the latter.
Suppose that two numbers fell into the same bin: $acdot nequiv bcdot npmod p$. Then $(acdot n-bcdot n)equiv 0bmod p$, so there's some number $c$ with $(a-b)cdot n=ccdot p$. Now, can you finish up from here? (This is where it's essential that $p$ is prime.)
Once you know that no two numbers fall into the same bin, then the rest is just an application of the pigeonhole principle: there are $p$ distinct equivalence classes of $acdot nbmod p$ for $0leq alt p$, and there are $p$ distinct representatives $langle brangle$ of those equivalence classes with $0leq blt p$, so the former must cover all the latter.
answered 2 days ago
Steven Stadnicki
40.1k765119
40.1k765119
Just so I'm understanding fully: p divides c*p, so p also divides (a-b)*n. But n does not divide p (p is prime), so p divides (a-b), meaning a = b mod p. Is this correct?
â Noah Caplinger
2 days ago
Pretty close - $p$ divides $(a-b)cdot n$, so either $p|(a-b)$ or $p|n$, and the latter is impossible since $nlt p$.
â Steven Stadnicki
2 days ago
So why is it essential that p is prime?
â Noah Caplinger
2 days ago
Because $a|bcdot c$ doesn't necessarily imply $a|b$ or $a|c$ if $a$ isn't a prime; consider, e.g., $4|6cdot10$.
â Steven Stadnicki
2 days ago
Thanks for the help!
â Noah Caplinger
2 days ago
add a comment |Â
Just so I'm understanding fully: p divides c*p, so p also divides (a-b)*n. But n does not divide p (p is prime), so p divides (a-b), meaning a = b mod p. Is this correct?
â Noah Caplinger
2 days ago
Pretty close - $p$ divides $(a-b)cdot n$, so either $p|(a-b)$ or $p|n$, and the latter is impossible since $nlt p$.
â Steven Stadnicki
2 days ago
So why is it essential that p is prime?
â Noah Caplinger
2 days ago
Because $a|bcdot c$ doesn't necessarily imply $a|b$ or $a|c$ if $a$ isn't a prime; consider, e.g., $4|6cdot10$.
â Steven Stadnicki
2 days ago
Thanks for the help!
â Noah Caplinger
2 days ago
Just so I'm understanding fully: p divides c*p, so p also divides (a-b)*n. But n does not divide p (p is prime), so p divides (a-b), meaning a = b mod p. Is this correct?
â Noah Caplinger
2 days ago
Just so I'm understanding fully: p divides c*p, so p also divides (a-b)*n. But n does not divide p (p is prime), so p divides (a-b), meaning a = b mod p. Is this correct?
â Noah Caplinger
2 days ago
Pretty close - $p$ divides $(a-b)cdot n$, so either $p|(a-b)$ or $p|n$, and the latter is impossible since $nlt p$.
â Steven Stadnicki
2 days ago
Pretty close - $p$ divides $(a-b)cdot n$, so either $p|(a-b)$ or $p|n$, and the latter is impossible since $nlt p$.
â Steven Stadnicki
2 days ago
So why is it essential that p is prime?
â Noah Caplinger
2 days ago
So why is it essential that p is prime?
â Noah Caplinger
2 days ago
Because $a|bcdot c$ doesn't necessarily imply $a|b$ or $a|c$ if $a$ isn't a prime; consider, e.g., $4|6cdot10$.
â Steven Stadnicki
2 days ago
Because $a|bcdot c$ doesn't necessarily imply $a|b$ or $a|c$ if $a$ isn't a prime; consider, e.g., $4|6cdot10$.
â Steven Stadnicki
2 days ago
Thanks for the help!
â Noah Caplinger
2 days ago
Thanks for the help!
â Noah Caplinger
2 days ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
This follows from the fact that $n$ is invertible in the ring $mathbbZ_p$ so you can solve the equation
$$ni = y$$
as
$$i = n^-1y$$
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
This follows from the fact that $n$ is invertible in the ring $mathbbZ_p$ so you can solve the equation
$$ni = y$$
as
$$i = n^-1y$$
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
This follows from the fact that $n$ is invertible in the ring $mathbbZ_p$ so you can solve the equation
$$ni = y$$
as
$$i = n^-1y$$
This follows from the fact that $n$ is invertible in the ring $mathbbZ_p$ so you can solve the equation
$$ni = y$$
as
$$i = n^-1y$$
answered 2 days ago
ploosu2
3,982922
3,982922
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2871759%2flet-p-be-prime-and-n-p-then-n-times-i-hits-every-residue-class-for%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
This is a similar question to the one that I asked here
â Bill Wallis
2 days ago