How to prove that if $aequiv b pmod{kn}$ then $a^kequiv b^k pmod{k^2n}$
$begingroup$
What I have done is this:
$aequiv b pmod{2n}$,
$a=b+ctimes2n$, for some $c$,
$a^2=b^2+2btimes ctimes2n+c^2times2^2n^2$,
$a^2-b^2=(btimes c+c^2n)times4n$, then
$a^2equiv b^2pmod{2^2n}$.
I think that this is right: what I DON’T understand is how to generalize this to:
$aequiv bpmod{kn}Rightarrow a^kequiv b^k pmod{k^2n}$.
Please give me a hint.
number-theory
$endgroup$
migrated from crypto.stackexchange.com Dec 1 '11 at 13:30
This question came from our site for software developers, mathematicians and others interested in cryptography.
add a comment |
$begingroup$
What I have done is this:
$aequiv b pmod{2n}$,
$a=b+ctimes2n$, for some $c$,
$a^2=b^2+2btimes ctimes2n+c^2times2^2n^2$,
$a^2-b^2=(btimes c+c^2n)times4n$, then
$a^2equiv b^2pmod{2^2n}$.
I think that this is right: what I DON’T understand is how to generalize this to:
$aequiv bpmod{kn}Rightarrow a^kequiv b^k pmod{k^2n}$.
Please give me a hint.
number-theory
$endgroup$
migrated from crypto.stackexchange.com Dec 1 '11 at 13:30
This question came from our site for software developers, mathematicians and others interested in cryptography.
$begingroup$
Hi @gurghet - I've migrated your question here as it has no direct relation to cryptography as is - so this is the best place to get a good answer.
$endgroup$
– user892
Dec 1 '11 at 13:32
add a comment |
$begingroup$
What I have done is this:
$aequiv b pmod{2n}$,
$a=b+ctimes2n$, for some $c$,
$a^2=b^2+2btimes ctimes2n+c^2times2^2n^2$,
$a^2-b^2=(btimes c+c^2n)times4n$, then
$a^2equiv b^2pmod{2^2n}$.
I think that this is right: what I DON’T understand is how to generalize this to:
$aequiv bpmod{kn}Rightarrow a^kequiv b^k pmod{k^2n}$.
Please give me a hint.
number-theory
$endgroup$
What I have done is this:
$aequiv b pmod{2n}$,
$a=b+ctimes2n$, for some $c$,
$a^2=b^2+2btimes ctimes2n+c^2times2^2n^2$,
$a^2-b^2=(btimes c+c^2n)times4n$, then
$a^2equiv b^2pmod{2^2n}$.
I think that this is right: what I DON’T understand is how to generalize this to:
$aequiv bpmod{kn}Rightarrow a^kequiv b^k pmod{k^2n}$.
Please give me a hint.
number-theory
number-theory
edited Jan 4 at 15:33
Bill Dubuque
213k29196654
213k29196654
asked Dec 1 '11 at 10:52
gurghetgurghet
276213
276213
migrated from crypto.stackexchange.com Dec 1 '11 at 13:30
This question came from our site for software developers, mathematicians and others interested in cryptography.
migrated from crypto.stackexchange.com Dec 1 '11 at 13:30
This question came from our site for software developers, mathematicians and others interested in cryptography.
$begingroup$
Hi @gurghet - I've migrated your question here as it has no direct relation to cryptography as is - so this is the best place to get a good answer.
$endgroup$
– user892
Dec 1 '11 at 13:32
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Hi @gurghet - I've migrated your question here as it has no direct relation to cryptography as is - so this is the best place to get a good answer.
$endgroup$
– user892
Dec 1 '11 at 13:32
$begingroup$
Hi @gurghet - I've migrated your question here as it has no direct relation to cryptography as is - so this is the best place to get a good answer.
$endgroup$
– user892
Dec 1 '11 at 13:32
$begingroup$
Hi @gurghet - I've migrated your question here as it has no direct relation to cryptography as is - so this is the best place to get a good answer.
$endgroup$
– user892
Dec 1 '11 at 13:32
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Since $aequiv bpmod{kn}$, we have
$$a=b+ckn$$
for some integer $c$. Now taking the $k$th power on both sides, we have
$$a^k=(b+ckn)^k.$$
By the binomial theorem, the right hand side is given by
$$(b+ckn)^k=b^k+sum_{i=1}^k{kchoose i}(ckn)^ib^{k-i}.$$
For $igeq 2$, it is clear that
${kchoose i}(ckn)^ib^{k-i}$ is divisble by $k^2n$. On the other hand, for $i=1$, we have
${kchoose i}(ckn)^ib^{k-i}=ck^2nb^{k-1}$, which is also divisble by $k^2n$. Therefore, by the above equality, we have
$$(b+ckn)^k=b^k+k^2nN$$
for some integer $N$. Combining all these, we have
$$a^k=(b+ckn)^k=b^k+k^2nN,$$
that is
$$a^kequiv b^k pmod{k^2n}.$$
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Thanks but I’m not sure about the binomial theorem. Is that right? I think it misses a $b^{k-i}$ in the sum.
$endgroup$
– gurghet
Dec 1 '11 at 16:01
$begingroup$
It works anyway! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– gurghet
Dec 1 '11 at 16:09
$begingroup$
@gurghet: Yes, you are right! I missed the term $b^{k-i}$. See my edited answer. Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Paul
Dec 1 '11 at 21:52
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Hint $ $ It's a special case of: $ $ a root of a polynomial is a double root if the derivative vanishes.
Thus to prove that $rm kmid a-b Rightarrow k^2 mid a^k-b^k = (a-b) dfrac{a^k-b^k}{a-b}, $ it suffices to prove
that $rm,k,$ divides the second factor $rm,g.,$ Theorem $Rightarrowrm, gequiv, (a^k)'equiv color{#c00}k, a^{k-1}equiv,0 pmod{!color{#c00}k}. $ QED
Theorem $ $ For $rm R$ a ring and $rm,f(x)in R[x]quad $ [Universal Polynomial Derivative Formula]
$$rmbegin{eqnarray}{}&rm g(x,y) &=&rm frac{f(x)-f(y)}{x-y} in R[x,y]\[.3em]
Rightarrow &rm g(x,x) &=&rm f'(x) in R[x]
end{eqnarray}$$
Proof $ $ By $rm,R$-linearity of the derivative it suffices to verify it for a monomial $rm f(x) = x^k,.$
$$begin{eqnarray}{}rm &rm g(x,y) &=&rm frac{x^k-y^k}{x-y}, = x^{k-1} + x^{k-2},y +, cdots, + x,y^{k-2} + y^{k-1}\[.3em]
Rightarrow &rm g(x,x) &=&rm k x^{k-1} = f'(x)quad {bf QED}
end{eqnarray}qquad $$
Remark $ $ To elaborate on a subtlety mentioned in a comment, $rm,g(x,y)in R[x,y],$ means that $rm ,g(x,y),$ denotes a polynomial in the indeterminates $rm,x,y,,$ whose coefficients lie in the ring $rm,R,$ (recall that $rm,x-y,$ divides $rm,f(x)-f(y),$ in $rm,R[x,y],$ by the Factor Theorem). Being a polynomial its value is well-defined for all values of $rm ,x,y,$ so we can "evaluate" it at $rm,y = x,$ (as is exemplified by the concrete case $rm,f(x) = x^k$ used in the proof).
In effect we exploit properties of polynomial rings to universally cancel an "apparent singularity" before evaluating. In more complicated contexts this can lead to nontrivial simplifications, e.g. replacing more complicated topological arguments by trivial algebraic arguments, e.g. see the discussion of the purely algebraic proof of Sylvester's determinant identity linked here.
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
It is worth emphasizing that $g(x,y)=dfrac{f(x)-f(y)}{x-y}in R[x,y]$ is NOT the imperative "take (f(x)-f(y)) and divide by (x-y)", but the polynomial in two variables (that's what "$in R[x,y]$" means) which when multiplied by (x-y) results in f(x)-f(y) -- this is why g(x,x) is not undefined.
$endgroup$
– Vladimir Sotirov
Feb 11 '12 at 17:39
$begingroup$
@VladimirSotirov Actually it does denote the result of that polynomial division. But evaluating it at "apparent singularities" requires that we compute the quotient before we evaluate it. I added a remark elaborating on this subtlety.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Jan 4 at 16:16
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Since
$a^k-b^k=(a-b)(a^{k-1}+a^{k-2}b+ldots b^{k-1})$
we need only prove that
$a^{k-1}+a^{k-2}b+ldots + b^{k-1}$ is divisible by $k$. But since $a equiv b (text{mod} k)$ we see that
$ a^{k-1}+a^{k-2}b+ldots + b^{k-1} equiv a^{k-1}+a^{k-1}+ldots +a^{k-1} equiv ka^{k-1} equiv 0 (text{mod} k). $
$endgroup$
add a comment |
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
});
}
});
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
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f87383%2fhow-to-prove-that-if-a-equiv-b-pmodkn-then-ak-equiv-bk-pmodk2n%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Since $aequiv bpmod{kn}$, we have
$$a=b+ckn$$
for some integer $c$. Now taking the $k$th power on both sides, we have
$$a^k=(b+ckn)^k.$$
By the binomial theorem, the right hand side is given by
$$(b+ckn)^k=b^k+sum_{i=1}^k{kchoose i}(ckn)^ib^{k-i}.$$
For $igeq 2$, it is clear that
${kchoose i}(ckn)^ib^{k-i}$ is divisble by $k^2n$. On the other hand, for $i=1$, we have
${kchoose i}(ckn)^ib^{k-i}=ck^2nb^{k-1}$, which is also divisble by $k^2n$. Therefore, by the above equality, we have
$$(b+ckn)^k=b^k+k^2nN$$
for some integer $N$. Combining all these, we have
$$a^k=(b+ckn)^k=b^k+k^2nN,$$
that is
$$a^kequiv b^k pmod{k^2n}.$$
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Thanks but I’m not sure about the binomial theorem. Is that right? I think it misses a $b^{k-i}$ in the sum.
$endgroup$
– gurghet
Dec 1 '11 at 16:01
$begingroup$
It works anyway! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– gurghet
Dec 1 '11 at 16:09
$begingroup$
@gurghet: Yes, you are right! I missed the term $b^{k-i}$. See my edited answer. Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Paul
Dec 1 '11 at 21:52
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Since $aequiv bpmod{kn}$, we have
$$a=b+ckn$$
for some integer $c$. Now taking the $k$th power on both sides, we have
$$a^k=(b+ckn)^k.$$
By the binomial theorem, the right hand side is given by
$$(b+ckn)^k=b^k+sum_{i=1}^k{kchoose i}(ckn)^ib^{k-i}.$$
For $igeq 2$, it is clear that
${kchoose i}(ckn)^ib^{k-i}$ is divisble by $k^2n$. On the other hand, for $i=1$, we have
${kchoose i}(ckn)^ib^{k-i}=ck^2nb^{k-1}$, which is also divisble by $k^2n$. Therefore, by the above equality, we have
$$(b+ckn)^k=b^k+k^2nN$$
for some integer $N$. Combining all these, we have
$$a^k=(b+ckn)^k=b^k+k^2nN,$$
that is
$$a^kequiv b^k pmod{k^2n}.$$
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Thanks but I’m not sure about the binomial theorem. Is that right? I think it misses a $b^{k-i}$ in the sum.
$endgroup$
– gurghet
Dec 1 '11 at 16:01
$begingroup$
It works anyway! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– gurghet
Dec 1 '11 at 16:09
$begingroup$
@gurghet: Yes, you are right! I missed the term $b^{k-i}$. See my edited answer. Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Paul
Dec 1 '11 at 21:52
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Since $aequiv bpmod{kn}$, we have
$$a=b+ckn$$
for some integer $c$. Now taking the $k$th power on both sides, we have
$$a^k=(b+ckn)^k.$$
By the binomial theorem, the right hand side is given by
$$(b+ckn)^k=b^k+sum_{i=1}^k{kchoose i}(ckn)^ib^{k-i}.$$
For $igeq 2$, it is clear that
${kchoose i}(ckn)^ib^{k-i}$ is divisble by $k^2n$. On the other hand, for $i=1$, we have
${kchoose i}(ckn)^ib^{k-i}=ck^2nb^{k-1}$, which is also divisble by $k^2n$. Therefore, by the above equality, we have
$$(b+ckn)^k=b^k+k^2nN$$
for some integer $N$. Combining all these, we have
$$a^k=(b+ckn)^k=b^k+k^2nN,$$
that is
$$a^kequiv b^k pmod{k^2n}.$$
$endgroup$
Since $aequiv bpmod{kn}$, we have
$$a=b+ckn$$
for some integer $c$. Now taking the $k$th power on both sides, we have
$$a^k=(b+ckn)^k.$$
By the binomial theorem, the right hand side is given by
$$(b+ckn)^k=b^k+sum_{i=1}^k{kchoose i}(ckn)^ib^{k-i}.$$
For $igeq 2$, it is clear that
${kchoose i}(ckn)^ib^{k-i}$ is divisble by $k^2n$. On the other hand, for $i=1$, we have
${kchoose i}(ckn)^ib^{k-i}=ck^2nb^{k-1}$, which is also divisble by $k^2n$. Therefore, by the above equality, we have
$$(b+ckn)^k=b^k+k^2nN$$
for some integer $N$. Combining all these, we have
$$a^k=(b+ckn)^k=b^k+k^2nN,$$
that is
$$a^kequiv b^k pmod{k^2n}.$$
edited Dec 1 '11 at 21:51
answered Dec 1 '11 at 13:39
PaulPaul
16.1k33767
16.1k33767
1
$begingroup$
Thanks but I’m not sure about the binomial theorem. Is that right? I think it misses a $b^{k-i}$ in the sum.
$endgroup$
– gurghet
Dec 1 '11 at 16:01
$begingroup$
It works anyway! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– gurghet
Dec 1 '11 at 16:09
$begingroup$
@gurghet: Yes, you are right! I missed the term $b^{k-i}$. See my edited answer. Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Paul
Dec 1 '11 at 21:52
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
Thanks but I’m not sure about the binomial theorem. Is that right? I think it misses a $b^{k-i}$ in the sum.
$endgroup$
– gurghet
Dec 1 '11 at 16:01
$begingroup$
It works anyway! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– gurghet
Dec 1 '11 at 16:09
$begingroup$
@gurghet: Yes, you are right! I missed the term $b^{k-i}$. See my edited answer. Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Paul
Dec 1 '11 at 21:52
1
1
$begingroup$
Thanks but I’m not sure about the binomial theorem. Is that right? I think it misses a $b^{k-i}$ in the sum.
$endgroup$
– gurghet
Dec 1 '11 at 16:01
$begingroup$
Thanks but I’m not sure about the binomial theorem. Is that right? I think it misses a $b^{k-i}$ in the sum.
$endgroup$
– gurghet
Dec 1 '11 at 16:01
$begingroup$
It works anyway! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– gurghet
Dec 1 '11 at 16:09
$begingroup$
It works anyway! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– gurghet
Dec 1 '11 at 16:09
$begingroup$
@gurghet: Yes, you are right! I missed the term $b^{k-i}$. See my edited answer. Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Paul
Dec 1 '11 at 21:52
$begingroup$
@gurghet: Yes, you are right! I missed the term $b^{k-i}$. See my edited answer. Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Paul
Dec 1 '11 at 21:52
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Hint $ $ It's a special case of: $ $ a root of a polynomial is a double root if the derivative vanishes.
Thus to prove that $rm kmid a-b Rightarrow k^2 mid a^k-b^k = (a-b) dfrac{a^k-b^k}{a-b}, $ it suffices to prove
that $rm,k,$ divides the second factor $rm,g.,$ Theorem $Rightarrowrm, gequiv, (a^k)'equiv color{#c00}k, a^{k-1}equiv,0 pmod{!color{#c00}k}. $ QED
Theorem $ $ For $rm R$ a ring and $rm,f(x)in R[x]quad $ [Universal Polynomial Derivative Formula]
$$rmbegin{eqnarray}{}&rm g(x,y) &=&rm frac{f(x)-f(y)}{x-y} in R[x,y]\[.3em]
Rightarrow &rm g(x,x) &=&rm f'(x) in R[x]
end{eqnarray}$$
Proof $ $ By $rm,R$-linearity of the derivative it suffices to verify it for a monomial $rm f(x) = x^k,.$
$$begin{eqnarray}{}rm &rm g(x,y) &=&rm frac{x^k-y^k}{x-y}, = x^{k-1} + x^{k-2},y +, cdots, + x,y^{k-2} + y^{k-1}\[.3em]
Rightarrow &rm g(x,x) &=&rm k x^{k-1} = f'(x)quad {bf QED}
end{eqnarray}qquad $$
Remark $ $ To elaborate on a subtlety mentioned in a comment, $rm,g(x,y)in R[x,y],$ means that $rm ,g(x,y),$ denotes a polynomial in the indeterminates $rm,x,y,,$ whose coefficients lie in the ring $rm,R,$ (recall that $rm,x-y,$ divides $rm,f(x)-f(y),$ in $rm,R[x,y],$ by the Factor Theorem). Being a polynomial its value is well-defined for all values of $rm ,x,y,$ so we can "evaluate" it at $rm,y = x,$ (as is exemplified by the concrete case $rm,f(x) = x^k$ used in the proof).
In effect we exploit properties of polynomial rings to universally cancel an "apparent singularity" before evaluating. In more complicated contexts this can lead to nontrivial simplifications, e.g. replacing more complicated topological arguments by trivial algebraic arguments, e.g. see the discussion of the purely algebraic proof of Sylvester's determinant identity linked here.
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
It is worth emphasizing that $g(x,y)=dfrac{f(x)-f(y)}{x-y}in R[x,y]$ is NOT the imperative "take (f(x)-f(y)) and divide by (x-y)", but the polynomial in two variables (that's what "$in R[x,y]$" means) which when multiplied by (x-y) results in f(x)-f(y) -- this is why g(x,x) is not undefined.
$endgroup$
– Vladimir Sotirov
Feb 11 '12 at 17:39
$begingroup$
@VladimirSotirov Actually it does denote the result of that polynomial division. But evaluating it at "apparent singularities" requires that we compute the quotient before we evaluate it. I added a remark elaborating on this subtlety.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Jan 4 at 16:16
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Hint $ $ It's a special case of: $ $ a root of a polynomial is a double root if the derivative vanishes.
Thus to prove that $rm kmid a-b Rightarrow k^2 mid a^k-b^k = (a-b) dfrac{a^k-b^k}{a-b}, $ it suffices to prove
that $rm,k,$ divides the second factor $rm,g.,$ Theorem $Rightarrowrm, gequiv, (a^k)'equiv color{#c00}k, a^{k-1}equiv,0 pmod{!color{#c00}k}. $ QED
Theorem $ $ For $rm R$ a ring and $rm,f(x)in R[x]quad $ [Universal Polynomial Derivative Formula]
$$rmbegin{eqnarray}{}&rm g(x,y) &=&rm frac{f(x)-f(y)}{x-y} in R[x,y]\[.3em]
Rightarrow &rm g(x,x) &=&rm f'(x) in R[x]
end{eqnarray}$$
Proof $ $ By $rm,R$-linearity of the derivative it suffices to verify it for a monomial $rm f(x) = x^k,.$
$$begin{eqnarray}{}rm &rm g(x,y) &=&rm frac{x^k-y^k}{x-y}, = x^{k-1} + x^{k-2},y +, cdots, + x,y^{k-2} + y^{k-1}\[.3em]
Rightarrow &rm g(x,x) &=&rm k x^{k-1} = f'(x)quad {bf QED}
end{eqnarray}qquad $$
Remark $ $ To elaborate on a subtlety mentioned in a comment, $rm,g(x,y)in R[x,y],$ means that $rm ,g(x,y),$ denotes a polynomial in the indeterminates $rm,x,y,,$ whose coefficients lie in the ring $rm,R,$ (recall that $rm,x-y,$ divides $rm,f(x)-f(y),$ in $rm,R[x,y],$ by the Factor Theorem). Being a polynomial its value is well-defined for all values of $rm ,x,y,$ so we can "evaluate" it at $rm,y = x,$ (as is exemplified by the concrete case $rm,f(x) = x^k$ used in the proof).
In effect we exploit properties of polynomial rings to universally cancel an "apparent singularity" before evaluating. In more complicated contexts this can lead to nontrivial simplifications, e.g. replacing more complicated topological arguments by trivial algebraic arguments, e.g. see the discussion of the purely algebraic proof of Sylvester's determinant identity linked here.
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
It is worth emphasizing that $g(x,y)=dfrac{f(x)-f(y)}{x-y}in R[x,y]$ is NOT the imperative "take (f(x)-f(y)) and divide by (x-y)", but the polynomial in two variables (that's what "$in R[x,y]$" means) which when multiplied by (x-y) results in f(x)-f(y) -- this is why g(x,x) is not undefined.
$endgroup$
– Vladimir Sotirov
Feb 11 '12 at 17:39
$begingroup$
@VladimirSotirov Actually it does denote the result of that polynomial division. But evaluating it at "apparent singularities" requires that we compute the quotient before we evaluate it. I added a remark elaborating on this subtlety.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Jan 4 at 16:16
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Hint $ $ It's a special case of: $ $ a root of a polynomial is a double root if the derivative vanishes.
Thus to prove that $rm kmid a-b Rightarrow k^2 mid a^k-b^k = (a-b) dfrac{a^k-b^k}{a-b}, $ it suffices to prove
that $rm,k,$ divides the second factor $rm,g.,$ Theorem $Rightarrowrm, gequiv, (a^k)'equiv color{#c00}k, a^{k-1}equiv,0 pmod{!color{#c00}k}. $ QED
Theorem $ $ For $rm R$ a ring and $rm,f(x)in R[x]quad $ [Universal Polynomial Derivative Formula]
$$rmbegin{eqnarray}{}&rm g(x,y) &=&rm frac{f(x)-f(y)}{x-y} in R[x,y]\[.3em]
Rightarrow &rm g(x,x) &=&rm f'(x) in R[x]
end{eqnarray}$$
Proof $ $ By $rm,R$-linearity of the derivative it suffices to verify it for a monomial $rm f(x) = x^k,.$
$$begin{eqnarray}{}rm &rm g(x,y) &=&rm frac{x^k-y^k}{x-y}, = x^{k-1} + x^{k-2},y +, cdots, + x,y^{k-2} + y^{k-1}\[.3em]
Rightarrow &rm g(x,x) &=&rm k x^{k-1} = f'(x)quad {bf QED}
end{eqnarray}qquad $$
Remark $ $ To elaborate on a subtlety mentioned in a comment, $rm,g(x,y)in R[x,y],$ means that $rm ,g(x,y),$ denotes a polynomial in the indeterminates $rm,x,y,,$ whose coefficients lie in the ring $rm,R,$ (recall that $rm,x-y,$ divides $rm,f(x)-f(y),$ in $rm,R[x,y],$ by the Factor Theorem). Being a polynomial its value is well-defined for all values of $rm ,x,y,$ so we can "evaluate" it at $rm,y = x,$ (as is exemplified by the concrete case $rm,f(x) = x^k$ used in the proof).
In effect we exploit properties of polynomial rings to universally cancel an "apparent singularity" before evaluating. In more complicated contexts this can lead to nontrivial simplifications, e.g. replacing more complicated topological arguments by trivial algebraic arguments, e.g. see the discussion of the purely algebraic proof of Sylvester's determinant identity linked here.
$endgroup$
Hint $ $ It's a special case of: $ $ a root of a polynomial is a double root if the derivative vanishes.
Thus to prove that $rm kmid a-b Rightarrow k^2 mid a^k-b^k = (a-b) dfrac{a^k-b^k}{a-b}, $ it suffices to prove
that $rm,k,$ divides the second factor $rm,g.,$ Theorem $Rightarrowrm, gequiv, (a^k)'equiv color{#c00}k, a^{k-1}equiv,0 pmod{!color{#c00}k}. $ QED
Theorem $ $ For $rm R$ a ring and $rm,f(x)in R[x]quad $ [Universal Polynomial Derivative Formula]
$$rmbegin{eqnarray}{}&rm g(x,y) &=&rm frac{f(x)-f(y)}{x-y} in R[x,y]\[.3em]
Rightarrow &rm g(x,x) &=&rm f'(x) in R[x]
end{eqnarray}$$
Proof $ $ By $rm,R$-linearity of the derivative it suffices to verify it for a monomial $rm f(x) = x^k,.$
$$begin{eqnarray}{}rm &rm g(x,y) &=&rm frac{x^k-y^k}{x-y}, = x^{k-1} + x^{k-2},y +, cdots, + x,y^{k-2} + y^{k-1}\[.3em]
Rightarrow &rm g(x,x) &=&rm k x^{k-1} = f'(x)quad {bf QED}
end{eqnarray}qquad $$
Remark $ $ To elaborate on a subtlety mentioned in a comment, $rm,g(x,y)in R[x,y],$ means that $rm ,g(x,y),$ denotes a polynomial in the indeterminates $rm,x,y,,$ whose coefficients lie in the ring $rm,R,$ (recall that $rm,x-y,$ divides $rm,f(x)-f(y),$ in $rm,R[x,y],$ by the Factor Theorem). Being a polynomial its value is well-defined for all values of $rm ,x,y,$ so we can "evaluate" it at $rm,y = x,$ (as is exemplified by the concrete case $rm,f(x) = x^k$ used in the proof).
In effect we exploit properties of polynomial rings to universally cancel an "apparent singularity" before evaluating. In more complicated contexts this can lead to nontrivial simplifications, e.g. replacing more complicated topological arguments by trivial algebraic arguments, e.g. see the discussion of the purely algebraic proof of Sylvester's determinant identity linked here.
edited Mar 20 at 21:45
answered Jan 23 '12 at 6:01
Bill DubuqueBill Dubuque
213k29196654
213k29196654
2
$begingroup$
It is worth emphasizing that $g(x,y)=dfrac{f(x)-f(y)}{x-y}in R[x,y]$ is NOT the imperative "take (f(x)-f(y)) and divide by (x-y)", but the polynomial in two variables (that's what "$in R[x,y]$" means) which when multiplied by (x-y) results in f(x)-f(y) -- this is why g(x,x) is not undefined.
$endgroup$
– Vladimir Sotirov
Feb 11 '12 at 17:39
$begingroup$
@VladimirSotirov Actually it does denote the result of that polynomial division. But evaluating it at "apparent singularities" requires that we compute the quotient before we evaluate it. I added a remark elaborating on this subtlety.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Jan 4 at 16:16
add a comment |
2
$begingroup$
It is worth emphasizing that $g(x,y)=dfrac{f(x)-f(y)}{x-y}in R[x,y]$ is NOT the imperative "take (f(x)-f(y)) and divide by (x-y)", but the polynomial in two variables (that's what "$in R[x,y]$" means) which when multiplied by (x-y) results in f(x)-f(y) -- this is why g(x,x) is not undefined.
$endgroup$
– Vladimir Sotirov
Feb 11 '12 at 17:39
$begingroup$
@VladimirSotirov Actually it does denote the result of that polynomial division. But evaluating it at "apparent singularities" requires that we compute the quotient before we evaluate it. I added a remark elaborating on this subtlety.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Jan 4 at 16:16
2
2
$begingroup$
It is worth emphasizing that $g(x,y)=dfrac{f(x)-f(y)}{x-y}in R[x,y]$ is NOT the imperative "take (f(x)-f(y)) and divide by (x-y)", but the polynomial in two variables (that's what "$in R[x,y]$" means) which when multiplied by (x-y) results in f(x)-f(y) -- this is why g(x,x) is not undefined.
$endgroup$
– Vladimir Sotirov
Feb 11 '12 at 17:39
$begingroup$
It is worth emphasizing that $g(x,y)=dfrac{f(x)-f(y)}{x-y}in R[x,y]$ is NOT the imperative "take (f(x)-f(y)) and divide by (x-y)", but the polynomial in two variables (that's what "$in R[x,y]$" means) which when multiplied by (x-y) results in f(x)-f(y) -- this is why g(x,x) is not undefined.
$endgroup$
– Vladimir Sotirov
Feb 11 '12 at 17:39
$begingroup$
@VladimirSotirov Actually it does denote the result of that polynomial division. But evaluating it at "apparent singularities" requires that we compute the quotient before we evaluate it. I added a remark elaborating on this subtlety.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Jan 4 at 16:16
$begingroup$
@VladimirSotirov Actually it does denote the result of that polynomial division. But evaluating it at "apparent singularities" requires that we compute the quotient before we evaluate it. I added a remark elaborating on this subtlety.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Jan 4 at 16:16
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Since
$a^k-b^k=(a-b)(a^{k-1}+a^{k-2}b+ldots b^{k-1})$
we need only prove that
$a^{k-1}+a^{k-2}b+ldots + b^{k-1}$ is divisible by $k$. But since $a equiv b (text{mod} k)$ we see that
$ a^{k-1}+a^{k-2}b+ldots + b^{k-1} equiv a^{k-1}+a^{k-1}+ldots +a^{k-1} equiv ka^{k-1} equiv 0 (text{mod} k). $
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Since
$a^k-b^k=(a-b)(a^{k-1}+a^{k-2}b+ldots b^{k-1})$
we need only prove that
$a^{k-1}+a^{k-2}b+ldots + b^{k-1}$ is divisible by $k$. But since $a equiv b (text{mod} k)$ we see that
$ a^{k-1}+a^{k-2}b+ldots + b^{k-1} equiv a^{k-1}+a^{k-1}+ldots +a^{k-1} equiv ka^{k-1} equiv 0 (text{mod} k). $
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Since
$a^k-b^k=(a-b)(a^{k-1}+a^{k-2}b+ldots b^{k-1})$
we need only prove that
$a^{k-1}+a^{k-2}b+ldots + b^{k-1}$ is divisible by $k$. But since $a equiv b (text{mod} k)$ we see that
$ a^{k-1}+a^{k-2}b+ldots + b^{k-1} equiv a^{k-1}+a^{k-1}+ldots +a^{k-1} equiv ka^{k-1} equiv 0 (text{mod} k). $
$endgroup$
Since
$a^k-b^k=(a-b)(a^{k-1}+a^{k-2}b+ldots b^{k-1})$
we need only prove that
$a^{k-1}+a^{k-2}b+ldots + b^{k-1}$ is divisible by $k$. But since $a equiv b (text{mod} k)$ we see that
$ a^{k-1}+a^{k-2}b+ldots + b^{k-1} equiv a^{k-1}+a^{k-1}+ldots +a^{k-1} equiv ka^{k-1} equiv 0 (text{mod} k). $
answered Dec 1 '11 at 14:54
JohanJohan
1,2011821
1,2011821
add a comment |
add a comment |
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.
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
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f87383%2fhow-to-prove-that-if-a-equiv-b-pmodkn-then-ak-equiv-bk-pmodk2n%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
Required, but never shown
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
Required, but never shown
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
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
$begingroup$
Hi @gurghet - I've migrated your question here as it has no direct relation to cryptography as is - so this is the best place to get a good answer.
$endgroup$
– user892
Dec 1 '11 at 13:32