Chapter 4

Solving Linear Congruences Chinese Remainder Theorem Moduli are not Relatively Prime Properties of Eulers Functio
Chapter 4 - Solving Linear Congruences, Chinese Remainder Theorem, and Eulers Function
March 3, 2007
Solving Linear Congruences Chinese Remainder Theorem Moduli are not Relatively Prime Properties of Eulers Function
Lemma 4.1
Lemma 4.1 Given relatively prime integers a and m, there exists an integer b, unique modulo m, such that a b 1 (mod m).
Lemma 4.1
Lemma 4.1 Given relatively prime integers a and m, there exists an integer b, unique modulo m, such that a b 1 (mod m). Denition If a b 1 (mod m), then we say that b is the inverse of a modulo m.
Proof of Lemma 4.1
Proof of Lemma 4.1 By the Euclidean algorithm (Algorithm 1.8) we can nd integers b and c such that a b + m c = 1. This means that a b is congruent to 1 modulo m. Let e be any other integer satisfying a e 1 (mod m).
Proof of Lemma 4.1 - Cont.
Proof of Lemma 4.1 - Cont. Then, e e (a b) (mod m) (a e) b (mod m) b (mod m)
Chinese Remainder Theorem
We need to prove that if p and q are distinct primes, then (p q) = (p 1) (q 1).
We need to prove that if p and q are distinct primes, then (p q) = (p 1) (q 1).
We will prove more. The starting point is an algorithm that appeared in the rst century A.D. simultaneously in China, in the writings of Sun-Tsu, and in Judea, in a book by Nichomachus of Gerasa.

Theorem 4.4 Let m1 , m2 , . . . , mr be positive integers that are pairwise relatively prime (i.e., no two share a common factor larger than one). Let a1 , a2 , . . . , ar be arbitrary integers. Then there exists an integer a such that a a1 (mod m1 ) a2 (mod m2 ) . . . ar (mod mr ). Furthermore, a is unique modulo M = m1 m2 mr .
Proof of Theorem 4.4

Proof of Theorem 4.4 We will actually nd an algorithm for constructing a. For each i from 1 up to r , dene Mi by Mi = (M/mi )(mi ) . Since M/mi is relatively prime to mi and divisible by mj for every j not equal to i, we have that Mi Mj for every j not equal to i. 1 (mod mi ) 0 (mod mi )
Proof of Theorem 4.4 - Cont.

Proof of Theorem 4.4 - Cont. Dene a by a = a1 M1 + a2 M2 + + ar Mr .

Proof of Theorem 4.4 - Cont. Dene a by a = a1 M1 + a2 M2 + + ar Mr . To see that a is unique modulo M, let b be any other integer satisfying the r congruences. Then for each mi , a and b are congruent modulo mi . In other words, mi divides b a. Since this is true for every i, M divides b a which means that ab (mod M).

Proof of Theorem 4.4 - Cont. Dene a by a = a1 M1 + a2 M2 + + ar Mr . To see that a is unique modulo M, let b be any other integer satisfying the r congruences. Then for each mi , a and b are congruent modulo mi . In other words, mi divides b a. Since this is true for every i, M divides b a which means that ab (mod M).
Of course, one need only compute the values of Mi modulo M, which keeps the computations a little more reasonable.
Question
What if two or more of the moduli are divisible by the same prime? The Chinese Remainder Theorem does not work in this case.
Question
What if two or more of the moduli are divisible by the same prime? The Chinese Remainder Theorem does not work in this case. We rst observe that if we have a congruence with a modulus which is divisible by more than one prime, then we can split our single congruence into several congruences as long as the new moduli are relatively prime and their product is the original modulus.
Example
Example x 3 (mod 45)
Example
Example x 3 (mod 45) is equivalent to x 3 (mod 5) and x 3 (mod 9).
Example
Example x 3 (mod 45) is equivalent to x 3 (mod 5) and x 3 (mod 9).
The equivalence is a consequence of the Chinese Remainder Theorem.
Procedure and Example

Procedure Let us assume that in our system of congruences we have two moduli say m1 and m2 that are both divisible by the same prime p.

Procedure Let us assume that in our system of congruences we have two moduli say m1 and m2 that are both divisible by the same prime p. We split each of our congruences into two congruences as explained above where one of the new moduli is the highest power of p dividing m1 or m2 , respectively.

Procedure Let us assume that in our system of congruences we have two moduli say m1 and m2 that are both divisible by the same prime p. We split each of our congruences into two congruences as explained above where one of the new moduli is the highest power of p dividing m1 or m2 , respectively. Example As an example, the two congruences x x 3 (mod 45) 7 (mod 756)
Example - Cont.
Example - Cont. are split into four congruences: x x x x 3 (mod 9) 7 (mod 27) 3 (mod 5) 7 (mod 28).
Example - Cont.
Example - Cont. are split into four congruences: x x x x 3 (mod 9) 7 (mod 27) 3 (mod 5) 7 (mod 28).
We now have two congruences that both involve powers of p. One of two things has to happen:
Two Things
Two Things 1. The congruences are contradictory and so there are no solutions. This is the case with the example given above. If x 3 (mod 9), then x 3, 12, or 21 (mod 27). or
Two Things
Two Things 1. The congruences are contradictory and so there are no solutions. This is the case with the example given above. If x 3 (mod 9), then x 3, 12, or 21 (mod 27). or 2. Both of the congruences for powers of p are implied by the congruence with the higher power. This means we can get rid of one of our equations, leaving us with three congruences with relatively prime moduli for which we can use the Chinese Remainder Theorem.
Example
Example Consider the system of congruences, x x 7 (mod 200) 82 (mod 375).
Example
Example Consider the system of congruences, x x 7 (mod 200) 82 (mod 375).
This splits into four congruences: x x x x 7 (mod 25) 82 (mod 125) 7 (mod 8) 82 (mod 3).
Example - Cont.
Example - Cont. The congruence modulo 25 is a special case of the congruence modulo 125, so we really have three congruences to relatively prime moduli:
Example - Cont.
Example - Cont. The congruence modulo 25 is a special case of the congruence modulo 125, so we really have three congruences to relatively prime moduli: x x x 82 (mod 125) 7 (mod 8) 82 1 (mod 3),
Example - Cont.
Example - Cont. The congruence modulo 25 is a special case of the congruence modulo 125, so we really have three congruences to relatively prime moduli: x x x 82 (mod 125) 7 (mod 8) 82 1 (mod 3),
which has as a solution x 1207 (mod 3000).
Lemma 4.6
Lemma 4.6 If gcd(m, n) = 1, then (m n) = (m) (n).
Lemma 4.6
Lemma 4.6 If gcd(m, n) = 1, then (m n) = (m) (n). Proof Let a be a positive integer less than and relatively prime to m n. In other words, a is one of the integers counted by (m n).
Lemma 4.6
Lemma 4.6 If gcd(m, n) = 1, then (m n) = (m) (n). Proof Let a be a positive integer less than and relatively prime to m n. In other words, a is one of the integers counted by (m n). We consider the correspondence a (a mod m, a mod n).
Proof of Lemma 4.6 - Cont. The integer a is relatively prime to m and relatively prime to n, so a mod m and a mod n are relatively prime to m and n, respectively.
Proof of Lemma 4.6 - Cont. The integer a is relatively prime to m and relatively prime to n, so a mod m and a mod n are relatively prime to m and n, respectively. This means that each integer counted by (m n) corresponds to a pair of integers, the rst counted by (m) and the second counted by (n).

Proof of Lemma 4.6 - Cont. By the second part of Theorem 4.4, distinct integers counted by (m n) correspond to distinct pairs. Therefore, (m n) is at most the number of such pairs: (m n) (m) (n).

Proof of Lemma 4.6 - Cont. By the second part of Theorem 4.4, distinct integers counted by (m n) correspond to distinct pairs. Therefore, (m n) is at most the number of such pairs: (m n) (m) (n). In the other direction, we take a pair of integers, one counted by (m) and the other counted by (n). Since m and n are relatively prime, we can use the rst part of Theorem 4.4 to construct a unique positive integer a less than and relatively prime to m n.

Proof of Lemma 4.6 - Cont. By the Chinese Remainder Theorem (b, c) a b (mod m) and c (mod n).

So the number of such pairs is at most (m n): (m n) (m) (n).

So the number of such pairs is at most (m n): (m n) (m) (n). In Exercise 4.17 you are asked to prove that if p is a prime, then (pa ) = pa1 (p 1).
Theorem 4.7
With this equality and Lemma 4.6, we can calculate (n) for n that we can factor.
Theorem 4.7
With this equality and Lemma 4.6, we can calculate (n) for n that we can factor. Theorem 4.7 Let
a a a n = p11 p22 pr r
be the unique factorization of n. Then (n) = n 1 1 p1 1 1 p2 1 1 pr .

Chapter 4

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Chapter 4

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Solving Linear Congruences Chinese Remainder Theorem Moduli are not Relatively Prime Properties of Eulers Functio

Proof of Lemma 4.1

Proof of Lemma 4.1 - Cont.

Proof of Lemma 4.1 - Cont. Then, e e (a b) (mod m) (a e) b (mod m) b (mod m)

Chinese Remainder Theorem

We need to prove that if p and q are distinct primes, then (p q) = (p 1) (q 1).

Chinese Remainder Theorem

We need to prove that if p and q are distinct primes, then (p q) = (p 1) (q 1).

Chinese Remainder Theorem

Proof of Theorem 4.4

Proof of Theorem 4.4 - Cont.

Proof of Theorem 4.4 - Cont.

Proof of Theorem 4.4 - Cont.

Example x 3 (mod 45)

Example x 3 (mod 45) is equivalent to x 3 (mod 5) and x 3 (mod 9).

Example x 3 (mod 45) is equivalent to x 3 (mod 5) and x 3 (mod 9).

The equivalence is a consequence of the Chinese Remainder Theorem.

Procedure and Example

Procedure and Example

Procedure and Example

which has as a solution x 1207 (mod 3000).

Proof of Lemma 4.6 - Cont.

Proof of Lemma 4.6 - Cont.

Proof of Lemma 4.6 - Cont.

Proof of Lemma 4.6 - Cont.

Proof of Lemma 4.6 - Cont.

Proof of Lemma 4.6 - Cont.

So the number of such pairs is at most (m n): (m n) (m) (n).

Proof of Lemma 4.6 - Cont.

be the unique factorization of n. Then (n) = n 1 1 p1 1 1 p2 1 1 pr .

Potrebbero piacerti anche