Number Theory: Problem with proofsCongruence equation problemWhat does $ a pmod b$ mean?Linear congruence fill in the missing step?Proof: if $n > 1$ then $LD(n) $ is a prime numberNumber Theory Lemma About Linear Congruence (Explanation Needed)Chinese remainder theorem, how to get a ≡ b (mod pq) from a ≡ b (mod p) and a ≡ b (mod q)?Proof verification: $a+bequiv b+a ;; (mod;;n)$ and $abequiv ba ;; (mod;;n)$.Showing two different definitions of a primitive root are the sameweird gcd problem in number theoryNumber Theory Linear Diophantine Equations

Did I make a mistake by ccing email to boss to others?

How do you justify more code being written by following clean code practices?

Echo with obfuscation

Do you waste sorcery points if you try to apply metamagic to a spell from a scroll but fail to cast it?

Proving a complicated language is not a CFL

How much do grades matter for a future academia position?

Unable to disable Microsoft Store in domain environment

SOQL query causes internal Salesforce error

Is there a distance limit for minecart tracks?

Consistent Linux device enumeration

Should I assume I have passed probation?

How do I prevent inappropriate ads from appearing in my game?

Identifying "long and narrow" polygons in with Postgis

Can I cause damage to electrical appliances by unplugging them when they are turned on?

Difference between shutdown options

Why is participating in the European Parliamentary elections used as a threat?

Can I run 125khz RF circuit on a breadboard?

What the heck is gets(stdin) on site coderbyte?

Mimic lecturing on blackboard, facing audience

What is this high flying aircraft over Pennsylvania?

How would a solely written language work mechanically

Is stochastic gradient descent pseudo-stochastic?

Review your own paper in Mathematics

Personal or impersonal in a technical resume



Number Theory: Problem with proofs


Congruence equation problemWhat does $ a pmod b$ mean?Linear congruence fill in the missing step?Proof: if $n > 1$ then $LD(n) $ is a prime numberNumber Theory Lemma About Linear Congruence (Explanation Needed)Chinese remainder theorem, how to get a ≡ b (mod pq) from a ≡ b (mod p) and a ≡ b (mod q)?Proof verification: $a+bequiv b+a ;; (mod;;n)$ and $abequiv ba ;; (mod;;n)$.Showing two different definitions of a primitive root are the sameweird gcd problem in number theoryNumber Theory Linear Diophantine Equations













2












$begingroup$


There are two propositions in the chapter of Number Theory in my book, the proofs of which I am having trouble to understand.



enter image description here



enter image description here



For Proposition 3



I cannot understand the proof from "Therefore ..." in the third line. I was thinking that maybe "$m-l$ divides $k$" will be "$m-l$ divides $n$". Also, is $k/d$ an integer?
Also, can someone please give an example to clarify this theorem?



For Proposition 4



What does $f(x) in Z[x]$ mean? Why are the third brackets used?



I cannot understand how "By proposition 2, $a_ja^j equiv b_jb^j$ (mod $n$)...".
Can someone please explain?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    I think the book has a typo and instead of $m-l$ divides $k$" it is supposed to be "$d$ divides $k$". That fits with $(m-l)d = knimplies m-l = frac kd n$ which assumes $frac kd$ is an integer.... on the other hand, that is one heck of a type to make!
    $endgroup$
    – fleablood
    5 hours ago















2












$begingroup$


There are two propositions in the chapter of Number Theory in my book, the proofs of which I am having trouble to understand.



enter image description here



enter image description here



For Proposition 3



I cannot understand the proof from "Therefore ..." in the third line. I was thinking that maybe "$m-l$ divides $k$" will be "$m-l$ divides $n$". Also, is $k/d$ an integer?
Also, can someone please give an example to clarify this theorem?



For Proposition 4



What does $f(x) in Z[x]$ mean? Why are the third brackets used?



I cannot understand how "By proposition 2, $a_ja^j equiv b_jb^j$ (mod $n$)...".
Can someone please explain?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    I think the book has a typo and instead of $m-l$ divides $k$" it is supposed to be "$d$ divides $k$". That fits with $(m-l)d = knimplies m-l = frac kd n$ which assumes $frac kd$ is an integer.... on the other hand, that is one heck of a type to make!
    $endgroup$
    – fleablood
    5 hours ago













2












2








2





$begingroup$


There are two propositions in the chapter of Number Theory in my book, the proofs of which I am having trouble to understand.



enter image description here



enter image description here



For Proposition 3



I cannot understand the proof from "Therefore ..." in the third line. I was thinking that maybe "$m-l$ divides $k$" will be "$m-l$ divides $n$". Also, is $k/d$ an integer?
Also, can someone please give an example to clarify this theorem?



For Proposition 4



What does $f(x) in Z[x]$ mean? Why are the third brackets used?



I cannot understand how "By proposition 2, $a_ja^j equiv b_jb^j$ (mod $n$)...".
Can someone please explain?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




There are two propositions in the chapter of Number Theory in my book, the proofs of which I am having trouble to understand.



enter image description here



enter image description here



For Proposition 3



I cannot understand the proof from "Therefore ..." in the third line. I was thinking that maybe "$m-l$ divides $k$" will be "$m-l$ divides $n$". Also, is $k/d$ an integer?
Also, can someone please give an example to clarify this theorem?



For Proposition 4



What does $f(x) in Z[x]$ mean? Why are the third brackets used?



I cannot understand how "By proposition 2, $a_ja^j equiv b_jb^j$ (mod $n$)...".
Can someone please explain?







number-theory modular-arithmetic congruence-relations






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked 5 hours ago









MrAPMrAP

1,18721432




1,18721432











  • $begingroup$
    I think the book has a typo and instead of $m-l$ divides $k$" it is supposed to be "$d$ divides $k$". That fits with $(m-l)d = knimplies m-l = frac kd n$ which assumes $frac kd$ is an integer.... on the other hand, that is one heck of a type to make!
    $endgroup$
    – fleablood
    5 hours ago
















  • $begingroup$
    I think the book has a typo and instead of $m-l$ divides $k$" it is supposed to be "$d$ divides $k$". That fits with $(m-l)d = knimplies m-l = frac kd n$ which assumes $frac kd$ is an integer.... on the other hand, that is one heck of a type to make!
    $endgroup$
    – fleablood
    5 hours ago















$begingroup$
I think the book has a typo and instead of $m-l$ divides $k$" it is supposed to be "$d$ divides $k$". That fits with $(m-l)d = knimplies m-l = frac kd n$ which assumes $frac kd$ is an integer.... on the other hand, that is one heck of a type to make!
$endgroup$
– fleablood
5 hours ago




$begingroup$
I think the book has a typo and instead of $m-l$ divides $k$" it is supposed to be "$d$ divides $k$". That fits with $(m-l)d = knimplies m-l = frac kd n$ which assumes $frac kd$ is an integer.... on the other hand, that is one heck of a type to make!
$endgroup$
– fleablood
5 hours ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















4












$begingroup$

For proposition 3, I agree with fleablood's assessment in a comment above that this is probably a typo.



For proposition $4$, note that the thing you're asking about appears in a parenthesis, following the abbreviation "i.e.". That means that even without knowing what "$fin Bbb Z[x]$" means, we can infer that it's merely an alternative formulation of whatever came before, namely that $f$ is a polynomial with integral coefficients.



To actually answer the question, given a ring $R$, the notation $R[x]$ means "the ring (or set) of polynomials with coefficients in $R$". So $Bbb Z[x]$ is the ring of polynomials with integer coefficients. And $fin Bbb Z[x]$ means exactly that $f$ is an element of this ring.



As for why we use the brackets there? That's just convention. You could have $Bbb Z(x)$ as well, but that usually means the ring (or set) of rational functions with integer coefficients.



Finally, the "by proposition 2" thing, note that proposition 2 states that if we have a product of two things, and we change one of the factors to a congruent factor, the product is unchanged modulo $n$. So $$a_ja^j = a_ja^j-1cdot aequiv a_ja^j-1bpmod n$$
So we can swap one $a$ for a $b$. Now just swap the other $j-1$ $a$'s for $b$'s, one by one as proposition 2 says you're allowed to do, and finally you reach $a_jb^j$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    heck of a typo to make; and heck of a way to define and introduce notation (as an aside inside a parenthesis). If anything it should go the other way: "Let $f(x)in mathbb Z[x] (i.e. $f(x)$ is a polynomial with integer coefficients)". This book isn't winning me over.
    $endgroup$
    – fleablood
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @fleablood When I learned complex analysis, the book had enough strategically placed typos that I gave up and used wikipedia to learn the theorems instead. And the educational value of wikipedia math articles is not always the greatest, as they mostly seem like reference works. So I know how it is.
    $endgroup$
    – Arthur
    5 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    Shouldn't you write "$f(x)in Bbb Z[x]$" instead of "$fin Bbb Z[x]$" since $f$ denotes the set just like R (relation) denotes the set?
    $endgroup$
    – MrAP
    27 mins ago



















3












$begingroup$

I think the book made a typo and it isn't $m-l$ that divides $k$ (I don't see that as even true) but that $d$ divides $k$.



This follow as $d$ divides $kn$ but is relatively prime to $n$ so $d$ must divide $k$.



And hence, yes, $frac kd$ is an integer, for which we conclude $m-l equiv 0 pmod n$.



Note: This will not be true if $a, b, n$ will have a common divisor (other than $1$). Consider $8 equiv 20 mod 12$ but $2equiv 5 mod 12$ is .... wrong. (Although $2 equiv 5 pmod 3$.....)



--- I empathize. For a typo that is a doozy to make and utter destroys the intent of the proof.



....



$mathbb Z[x]$ means the set of all polynomials with integer coefficients.



So $f(x) in mathbb Z[x]$ means "Let $f(x)$ be a polynomial with integer coefficients.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    $(m-l)d=kn$ implies that $d$ divides $k$ and also $n$ divides $m-l$. Correct?
    $endgroup$
    – MrAP
    4 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    IF $d$ and $n$ are relatively prime (i.e. $gcd(d,n)=1$) then $d$ and $n$ have no factors in common. So if $(m-l)d = kn$ then $d$ divides $kn$. But as $d$ and $n$ have nothing in common, that means $d$ divides $k$. Likewise that means $n$ divides $(m-l)d$ but $n$ and $d$ have nothing in common so $n$ divides $m-l$..... BTW "$n$ divides $A$" and "$Aequiv 0 pmod n$" mean the exact same thing. And "$n$ divides $m-l$" and "$mequiv l pmod n$" and "$m-l equiv 0 pmod n$" all mean the same thing.
    $endgroup$
    – fleablood
    1 hour ago










Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3155648%2fnumber-theory-problem-with-proofs%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









4












$begingroup$

For proposition 3, I agree with fleablood's assessment in a comment above that this is probably a typo.



For proposition $4$, note that the thing you're asking about appears in a parenthesis, following the abbreviation "i.e.". That means that even without knowing what "$fin Bbb Z[x]$" means, we can infer that it's merely an alternative formulation of whatever came before, namely that $f$ is a polynomial with integral coefficients.



To actually answer the question, given a ring $R$, the notation $R[x]$ means "the ring (or set) of polynomials with coefficients in $R$". So $Bbb Z[x]$ is the ring of polynomials with integer coefficients. And $fin Bbb Z[x]$ means exactly that $f$ is an element of this ring.



As for why we use the brackets there? That's just convention. You could have $Bbb Z(x)$ as well, but that usually means the ring (or set) of rational functions with integer coefficients.



Finally, the "by proposition 2" thing, note that proposition 2 states that if we have a product of two things, and we change one of the factors to a congruent factor, the product is unchanged modulo $n$. So $$a_ja^j = a_ja^j-1cdot aequiv a_ja^j-1bpmod n$$
So we can swap one $a$ for a $b$. Now just swap the other $j-1$ $a$'s for $b$'s, one by one as proposition 2 says you're allowed to do, and finally you reach $a_jb^j$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    heck of a typo to make; and heck of a way to define and introduce notation (as an aside inside a parenthesis). If anything it should go the other way: "Let $f(x)in mathbb Z[x] (i.e. $f(x)$ is a polynomial with integer coefficients)". This book isn't winning me over.
    $endgroup$
    – fleablood
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @fleablood When I learned complex analysis, the book had enough strategically placed typos that I gave up and used wikipedia to learn the theorems instead. And the educational value of wikipedia math articles is not always the greatest, as they mostly seem like reference works. So I know how it is.
    $endgroup$
    – Arthur
    5 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    Shouldn't you write "$f(x)in Bbb Z[x]$" instead of "$fin Bbb Z[x]$" since $f$ denotes the set just like R (relation) denotes the set?
    $endgroup$
    – MrAP
    27 mins ago
















4












$begingroup$

For proposition 3, I agree with fleablood's assessment in a comment above that this is probably a typo.



For proposition $4$, note that the thing you're asking about appears in a parenthesis, following the abbreviation "i.e.". That means that even without knowing what "$fin Bbb Z[x]$" means, we can infer that it's merely an alternative formulation of whatever came before, namely that $f$ is a polynomial with integral coefficients.



To actually answer the question, given a ring $R$, the notation $R[x]$ means "the ring (or set) of polynomials with coefficients in $R$". So $Bbb Z[x]$ is the ring of polynomials with integer coefficients. And $fin Bbb Z[x]$ means exactly that $f$ is an element of this ring.



As for why we use the brackets there? That's just convention. You could have $Bbb Z(x)$ as well, but that usually means the ring (or set) of rational functions with integer coefficients.



Finally, the "by proposition 2" thing, note that proposition 2 states that if we have a product of two things, and we change one of the factors to a congruent factor, the product is unchanged modulo $n$. So $$a_ja^j = a_ja^j-1cdot aequiv a_ja^j-1bpmod n$$
So we can swap one $a$ for a $b$. Now just swap the other $j-1$ $a$'s for $b$'s, one by one as proposition 2 says you're allowed to do, and finally you reach $a_jb^j$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    heck of a typo to make; and heck of a way to define and introduce notation (as an aside inside a parenthesis). If anything it should go the other way: "Let $f(x)in mathbb Z[x] (i.e. $f(x)$ is a polynomial with integer coefficients)". This book isn't winning me over.
    $endgroup$
    – fleablood
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @fleablood When I learned complex analysis, the book had enough strategically placed typos that I gave up and used wikipedia to learn the theorems instead. And the educational value of wikipedia math articles is not always the greatest, as they mostly seem like reference works. So I know how it is.
    $endgroup$
    – Arthur
    5 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    Shouldn't you write "$f(x)in Bbb Z[x]$" instead of "$fin Bbb Z[x]$" since $f$ denotes the set just like R (relation) denotes the set?
    $endgroup$
    – MrAP
    27 mins ago














4












4








4





$begingroup$

For proposition 3, I agree with fleablood's assessment in a comment above that this is probably a typo.



For proposition $4$, note that the thing you're asking about appears in a parenthesis, following the abbreviation "i.e.". That means that even without knowing what "$fin Bbb Z[x]$" means, we can infer that it's merely an alternative formulation of whatever came before, namely that $f$ is a polynomial with integral coefficients.



To actually answer the question, given a ring $R$, the notation $R[x]$ means "the ring (or set) of polynomials with coefficients in $R$". So $Bbb Z[x]$ is the ring of polynomials with integer coefficients. And $fin Bbb Z[x]$ means exactly that $f$ is an element of this ring.



As for why we use the brackets there? That's just convention. You could have $Bbb Z(x)$ as well, but that usually means the ring (or set) of rational functions with integer coefficients.



Finally, the "by proposition 2" thing, note that proposition 2 states that if we have a product of two things, and we change one of the factors to a congruent factor, the product is unchanged modulo $n$. So $$a_ja^j = a_ja^j-1cdot aequiv a_ja^j-1bpmod n$$
So we can swap one $a$ for a $b$. Now just swap the other $j-1$ $a$'s for $b$'s, one by one as proposition 2 says you're allowed to do, and finally you reach $a_jb^j$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$



For proposition 3, I agree with fleablood's assessment in a comment above that this is probably a typo.



For proposition $4$, note that the thing you're asking about appears in a parenthesis, following the abbreviation "i.e.". That means that even without knowing what "$fin Bbb Z[x]$" means, we can infer that it's merely an alternative formulation of whatever came before, namely that $f$ is a polynomial with integral coefficients.



To actually answer the question, given a ring $R$, the notation $R[x]$ means "the ring (or set) of polynomials with coefficients in $R$". So $Bbb Z[x]$ is the ring of polynomials with integer coefficients. And $fin Bbb Z[x]$ means exactly that $f$ is an element of this ring.



As for why we use the brackets there? That's just convention. You could have $Bbb Z(x)$ as well, but that usually means the ring (or set) of rational functions with integer coefficients.



Finally, the "by proposition 2" thing, note that proposition 2 states that if we have a product of two things, and we change one of the factors to a congruent factor, the product is unchanged modulo $n$. So $$a_ja^j = a_ja^j-1cdot aequiv a_ja^j-1bpmod n$$
So we can swap one $a$ for a $b$. Now just swap the other $j-1$ $a$'s for $b$'s, one by one as proposition 2 says you're allowed to do, and finally you reach $a_jb^j$.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited 5 hours ago

























answered 5 hours ago









ArthurArthur

119k7118202




119k7118202











  • $begingroup$
    heck of a typo to make; and heck of a way to define and introduce notation (as an aside inside a parenthesis). If anything it should go the other way: "Let $f(x)in mathbb Z[x] (i.e. $f(x)$ is a polynomial with integer coefficients)". This book isn't winning me over.
    $endgroup$
    – fleablood
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @fleablood When I learned complex analysis, the book had enough strategically placed typos that I gave up and used wikipedia to learn the theorems instead. And the educational value of wikipedia math articles is not always the greatest, as they mostly seem like reference works. So I know how it is.
    $endgroup$
    – Arthur
    5 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    Shouldn't you write "$f(x)in Bbb Z[x]$" instead of "$fin Bbb Z[x]$" since $f$ denotes the set just like R (relation) denotes the set?
    $endgroup$
    – MrAP
    27 mins ago

















  • $begingroup$
    heck of a typo to make; and heck of a way to define and introduce notation (as an aside inside a parenthesis). If anything it should go the other way: "Let $f(x)in mathbb Z[x] (i.e. $f(x)$ is a polynomial with integer coefficients)". This book isn't winning me over.
    $endgroup$
    – fleablood
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @fleablood When I learned complex analysis, the book had enough strategically placed typos that I gave up and used wikipedia to learn the theorems instead. And the educational value of wikipedia math articles is not always the greatest, as they mostly seem like reference works. So I know how it is.
    $endgroup$
    – Arthur
    5 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    Shouldn't you write "$f(x)in Bbb Z[x]$" instead of "$fin Bbb Z[x]$" since $f$ denotes the set just like R (relation) denotes the set?
    $endgroup$
    – MrAP
    27 mins ago
















$begingroup$
heck of a typo to make; and heck of a way to define and introduce notation (as an aside inside a parenthesis). If anything it should go the other way: "Let $f(x)in mathbb Z[x] (i.e. $f(x)$ is a polynomial with integer coefficients)". This book isn't winning me over.
$endgroup$
– fleablood
5 hours ago




$begingroup$
heck of a typo to make; and heck of a way to define and introduce notation (as an aside inside a parenthesis). If anything it should go the other way: "Let $f(x)in mathbb Z[x] (i.e. $f(x)$ is a polynomial with integer coefficients)". This book isn't winning me over.
$endgroup$
– fleablood
5 hours ago












$begingroup$
@fleablood When I learned complex analysis, the book had enough strategically placed typos that I gave up and used wikipedia to learn the theorems instead. And the educational value of wikipedia math articles is not always the greatest, as they mostly seem like reference works. So I know how it is.
$endgroup$
– Arthur
5 hours ago





$begingroup$
@fleablood When I learned complex analysis, the book had enough strategically placed typos that I gave up and used wikipedia to learn the theorems instead. And the educational value of wikipedia math articles is not always the greatest, as they mostly seem like reference works. So I know how it is.
$endgroup$
– Arthur
5 hours ago













$begingroup$
Shouldn't you write "$f(x)in Bbb Z[x]$" instead of "$fin Bbb Z[x]$" since $f$ denotes the set just like R (relation) denotes the set?
$endgroup$
– MrAP
27 mins ago





$begingroup$
Shouldn't you write "$f(x)in Bbb Z[x]$" instead of "$fin Bbb Z[x]$" since $f$ denotes the set just like R (relation) denotes the set?
$endgroup$
– MrAP
27 mins ago












3












$begingroup$

I think the book made a typo and it isn't $m-l$ that divides $k$ (I don't see that as even true) but that $d$ divides $k$.



This follow as $d$ divides $kn$ but is relatively prime to $n$ so $d$ must divide $k$.



And hence, yes, $frac kd$ is an integer, for which we conclude $m-l equiv 0 pmod n$.



Note: This will not be true if $a, b, n$ will have a common divisor (other than $1$). Consider $8 equiv 20 mod 12$ but $2equiv 5 mod 12$ is .... wrong. (Although $2 equiv 5 pmod 3$.....)



--- I empathize. For a typo that is a doozy to make and utter destroys the intent of the proof.



....



$mathbb Z[x]$ means the set of all polynomials with integer coefficients.



So $f(x) in mathbb Z[x]$ means "Let $f(x)$ be a polynomial with integer coefficients.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    $(m-l)d=kn$ implies that $d$ divides $k$ and also $n$ divides $m-l$. Correct?
    $endgroup$
    – MrAP
    4 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    IF $d$ and $n$ are relatively prime (i.e. $gcd(d,n)=1$) then $d$ and $n$ have no factors in common. So if $(m-l)d = kn$ then $d$ divides $kn$. But as $d$ and $n$ have nothing in common, that means $d$ divides $k$. Likewise that means $n$ divides $(m-l)d$ but $n$ and $d$ have nothing in common so $n$ divides $m-l$..... BTW "$n$ divides $A$" and "$Aequiv 0 pmod n$" mean the exact same thing. And "$n$ divides $m-l$" and "$mequiv l pmod n$" and "$m-l equiv 0 pmod n$" all mean the same thing.
    $endgroup$
    – fleablood
    1 hour ago















3












$begingroup$

I think the book made a typo and it isn't $m-l$ that divides $k$ (I don't see that as even true) but that $d$ divides $k$.



This follow as $d$ divides $kn$ but is relatively prime to $n$ so $d$ must divide $k$.



And hence, yes, $frac kd$ is an integer, for which we conclude $m-l equiv 0 pmod n$.



Note: This will not be true if $a, b, n$ will have a common divisor (other than $1$). Consider $8 equiv 20 mod 12$ but $2equiv 5 mod 12$ is .... wrong. (Although $2 equiv 5 pmod 3$.....)



--- I empathize. For a typo that is a doozy to make and utter destroys the intent of the proof.



....



$mathbb Z[x]$ means the set of all polynomials with integer coefficients.



So $f(x) in mathbb Z[x]$ means "Let $f(x)$ be a polynomial with integer coefficients.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    $(m-l)d=kn$ implies that $d$ divides $k$ and also $n$ divides $m-l$. Correct?
    $endgroup$
    – MrAP
    4 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    IF $d$ and $n$ are relatively prime (i.e. $gcd(d,n)=1$) then $d$ and $n$ have no factors in common. So if $(m-l)d = kn$ then $d$ divides $kn$. But as $d$ and $n$ have nothing in common, that means $d$ divides $k$. Likewise that means $n$ divides $(m-l)d$ but $n$ and $d$ have nothing in common so $n$ divides $m-l$..... BTW "$n$ divides $A$" and "$Aequiv 0 pmod n$" mean the exact same thing. And "$n$ divides $m-l$" and "$mequiv l pmod n$" and "$m-l equiv 0 pmod n$" all mean the same thing.
    $endgroup$
    – fleablood
    1 hour ago













3












3








3





$begingroup$

I think the book made a typo and it isn't $m-l$ that divides $k$ (I don't see that as even true) but that $d$ divides $k$.



This follow as $d$ divides $kn$ but is relatively prime to $n$ so $d$ must divide $k$.



And hence, yes, $frac kd$ is an integer, for which we conclude $m-l equiv 0 pmod n$.



Note: This will not be true if $a, b, n$ will have a common divisor (other than $1$). Consider $8 equiv 20 mod 12$ but $2equiv 5 mod 12$ is .... wrong. (Although $2 equiv 5 pmod 3$.....)



--- I empathize. For a typo that is a doozy to make and utter destroys the intent of the proof.



....



$mathbb Z[x]$ means the set of all polynomials with integer coefficients.



So $f(x) in mathbb Z[x]$ means "Let $f(x)$ be a polynomial with integer coefficients.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$



I think the book made a typo and it isn't $m-l$ that divides $k$ (I don't see that as even true) but that $d$ divides $k$.



This follow as $d$ divides $kn$ but is relatively prime to $n$ so $d$ must divide $k$.



And hence, yes, $frac kd$ is an integer, for which we conclude $m-l equiv 0 pmod n$.



Note: This will not be true if $a, b, n$ will have a common divisor (other than $1$). Consider $8 equiv 20 mod 12$ but $2equiv 5 mod 12$ is .... wrong. (Although $2 equiv 5 pmod 3$.....)



--- I empathize. For a typo that is a doozy to make and utter destroys the intent of the proof.



....



$mathbb Z[x]$ means the set of all polynomials with integer coefficients.



So $f(x) in mathbb Z[x]$ means "Let $f(x)$ be a polynomial with integer coefficients.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited 5 hours ago

























answered 5 hours ago









fleabloodfleablood

72.8k22788




72.8k22788











  • $begingroup$
    $(m-l)d=kn$ implies that $d$ divides $k$ and also $n$ divides $m-l$. Correct?
    $endgroup$
    – MrAP
    4 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    IF $d$ and $n$ are relatively prime (i.e. $gcd(d,n)=1$) then $d$ and $n$ have no factors in common. So if $(m-l)d = kn$ then $d$ divides $kn$. But as $d$ and $n$ have nothing in common, that means $d$ divides $k$. Likewise that means $n$ divides $(m-l)d$ but $n$ and $d$ have nothing in common so $n$ divides $m-l$..... BTW "$n$ divides $A$" and "$Aequiv 0 pmod n$" mean the exact same thing. And "$n$ divides $m-l$" and "$mequiv l pmod n$" and "$m-l equiv 0 pmod n$" all mean the same thing.
    $endgroup$
    – fleablood
    1 hour ago
















  • $begingroup$
    $(m-l)d=kn$ implies that $d$ divides $k$ and also $n$ divides $m-l$. Correct?
    $endgroup$
    – MrAP
    4 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    IF $d$ and $n$ are relatively prime (i.e. $gcd(d,n)=1$) then $d$ and $n$ have no factors in common. So if $(m-l)d = kn$ then $d$ divides $kn$. But as $d$ and $n$ have nothing in common, that means $d$ divides $k$. Likewise that means $n$ divides $(m-l)d$ but $n$ and $d$ have nothing in common so $n$ divides $m-l$..... BTW "$n$ divides $A$" and "$Aequiv 0 pmod n$" mean the exact same thing. And "$n$ divides $m-l$" and "$mequiv l pmod n$" and "$m-l equiv 0 pmod n$" all mean the same thing.
    $endgroup$
    – fleablood
    1 hour ago















$begingroup$
$(m-l)d=kn$ implies that $d$ divides $k$ and also $n$ divides $m-l$. Correct?
$endgroup$
– MrAP
4 hours ago





$begingroup$
$(m-l)d=kn$ implies that $d$ divides $k$ and also $n$ divides $m-l$. Correct?
$endgroup$
– MrAP
4 hours ago













$begingroup$
IF $d$ and $n$ are relatively prime (i.e. $gcd(d,n)=1$) then $d$ and $n$ have no factors in common. So if $(m-l)d = kn$ then $d$ divides $kn$. But as $d$ and $n$ have nothing in common, that means $d$ divides $k$. Likewise that means $n$ divides $(m-l)d$ but $n$ and $d$ have nothing in common so $n$ divides $m-l$..... BTW "$n$ divides $A$" and "$Aequiv 0 pmod n$" mean the exact same thing. And "$n$ divides $m-l$" and "$mequiv l pmod n$" and "$m-l equiv 0 pmod n$" all mean the same thing.
$endgroup$
– fleablood
1 hour ago




$begingroup$
IF $d$ and $n$ are relatively prime (i.e. $gcd(d,n)=1$) then $d$ and $n$ have no factors in common. So if $(m-l)d = kn$ then $d$ divides $kn$. But as $d$ and $n$ have nothing in common, that means $d$ divides $k$. Likewise that means $n$ divides $(m-l)d$ but $n$ and $d$ have nothing in common so $n$ divides $m-l$..... BTW "$n$ divides $A$" and "$Aequiv 0 pmod n$" mean the exact same thing. And "$n$ divides $m-l$" and "$mequiv l pmod n$" and "$m-l equiv 0 pmod n$" all mean the same thing.
$endgroup$
– fleablood
1 hour ago

















draft saved

draft discarded
















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3155648%2fnumber-theory-problem-with-proofs%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

ValueError: Error when checking input: expected conv2d_13_input to have shape (3, 150, 150) but got array with shape (150, 150, 3)2019 Community Moderator ElectionError when checking : expected dense_1_input to have shape (None, 5) but got array with shape (200, 1)Error 'Expected 2D array, got 1D array instead:'ValueError: Error when checking input: expected lstm_41_input to have 3 dimensions, but got array with shape (40000,100)ValueError: Error when checking target: expected dense_1 to have shape (7,) but got array with shape (1,)ValueError: Error when checking target: expected dense_2 to have shape (1,) but got array with shape (0,)Keras exception: ValueError: Error when checking input: expected conv2d_1_input to have shape (150, 150, 3) but got array with shape (256, 256, 3)Steps taking too long to completewhen checking input: expected dense_1_input to have shape (13328,) but got array with shape (317,)ValueError: Error when checking target: expected dense_3 to have shape (None, 1) but got array with shape (7715, 40000)Keras exception: Error when checking input: expected dense_input to have shape (2,) but got array with shape (1,)

Ружовы пелікан Змест Знешні выгляд | Пашырэнне | Асаблівасці біялогіі | Літаратура | НавігацыяДагледжаная версіяправерана1 зменаДагледжаная версіяправерана1 змена/ 22697590 Сістэматыкана ВіківідахВыявына Вікісховішчы174693363011049382

Illegal assignment from SObject to ContactFetching String, Id from Map - Illegal Assignment Id to Field / ObjectError: Compile Error: Illegal assignment from String to BooleanError: List has no rows for assignment to SObjectError on Test Class - System.QueryException: List has no rows for assignment to SObjectRemote action problemDML requires SObject or SObject list type error“Illegal assignment from List to List”Test Class Fail: Batch Class: System.QueryException: List has no rows for assignment to SObjectMapping to a user'List has no rows for assignment to SObject' Mystery