Discussion | Articles | Blogs | Books | Contact Us | Chat | Shop | Search
  WrongPlanet.net
User Stats
   Members: 21,064
   Online Now: 386



People Online:
Visitors: 242
Members: 144
New Today: 13
New Yesterday: 22
Latest: Brennan123

Search
Google
Web WP.net



  Aspie Affection
Support Wrong Planet Awareness!
Question about modular arithmetic

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Wrong Planet Forums Forum Index -> Computers, Math, Science, and Technology
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Sovemp
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse


Joined: Jan 16, 2008
Age: 27
Posts: 25

PostPosted: Sun May 11, 2008 7:27 pm    Post subject: Question about modular arithmetic Reply with quote

Hello, all. I've been reading an Algorithms textbook, and there's something I just can't seem to understand, as pertains to the nature of multiplicative groups modulo n.

The text defines modular arithmetic as such, given we have two numbers a and b, and a' and b' such that a=a'(mod n) and b=b'(mod n), then ab = a' * b' (mod n). It then concludes (without any explanation that I can find), that the Multiplicative Group Modulo n is define as Zn = {[a]n which is in Zn: great common denominator of a and n = 1}. In other words, the group Zn is all the numbers 1 to n -1 that are relatively prime to n. My question then, is why is this? Addition has no such restraint. I've tried to find an example illustrating this, but I can't. For example, let's take Z15*, and take two numbers that are not relatively prime to 15, 18 and 21 (as three 3 and 5 divide 15 and 3 divides 21). So, my calculation by the definition is as follows:

a = 18 = 3 (modulo 15) = a'
and b = 21 = 6 (modulo 15) = b'

Thus we have a*b = 18 * 21 = 378 = 3 (modulo 15), and
a' * b' = 3 * 18 = 18 = 3 (modulo 15).

So, why aren't 18 and 21 (or there smallest positive elements in their respective equivalence classes, 3 and 6), not defined for the Z15 multiplicative group?

Thanks.
_________________
"Too few utilize the greatest freedom they have, the freedom of thought. Perhaps they demand freedom of speech as compensation."
-Soren Kirkegard
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
twoshots
Stranger


Joined: Nov 27, 2007
Posts: 1337
Location: NJ

PostPosted: Sun May 11, 2008 8:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If you are asking why the Z15* does not contain say 18, consider
18 = 3 mod 15.

For Z15*U{3} to be a group, 3 must have a multiplicative inverse mod 15. Hence we need
3x = 1 mod 15
=>
need a solution to the diphantine equation: 3x - 15y = 1
Somewhere as a preliminary you should know that the GCD of (3,15) is also the minimum positive integer that is a linear combination of 3 and 15, so if 3x - 15y = 1 has an integral solution (15,3) would be relatively prime.

That is, there exists x such that xa = ax = 1 mod(n) iff (n,a) are relatively prime. Therefore, the group can only have multiplicative inverses if all the numbers are relatively prime to 15.

That what you wanted?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sovemp
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse


Joined: Jan 16, 2008
Age: 27
Posts: 25

PostPosted: Sun May 11, 2008 8:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think I'm starting to understand now, you're saying that the the multiplicative group modulo n must have existing multiplicative inverses defined, otherwise it doesn't constitute a finite group, right?
_________________
"Too few utilize the greatest freedom they have, the freedom of thought. Perhaps they demand freedom of speech as compensation."
-Soren Kirkegard
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
twoshots
Stranger


Joined: Nov 27, 2007
Posts: 1337
Location: NJ

PostPosted: Sun May 11, 2008 9:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sovemp wrote:
I think I'm starting to understand now, you're saying that the the multiplicative group modulo n must have existing multiplicative inverses defined, otherwise it doesn't constitute a finite group, right?

Precisely, as per the definition of a group.

If the definition it gave you is as listed I can see how this might be less than apparent. The proper definition of modular congruence is
a = b (mod n) iff n | (a-b), i.e. n divides (a-b)

and we can derive various other properties from this.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sovemp
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse


Joined: Jan 16, 2008
Age: 27
Posts: 25

PostPosted: Sun May 11, 2008 9:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah, the stupid textbook doesn't point that out at all. Thanks again.
_________________
"Too few utilize the greatest freedom they have, the freedom of thought. Perhaps they demand freedom of speech as compensation."
-Soren Kirkegard
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
D1nk0
Phoenix
Phoenix


Joined: Dec 12, 2007
Age: 29
Posts: 1589

PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2008 9:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Z modulo N(the integers modulo n(any positive integer) is a collection of Unital Rings. If n=prime, than Z modulo n forms a
Field.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Wrong Planet Forums Forum Index -> Computers, Math, Science, and Technology All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Wrong PlanetTM Copyright 2004-2008, Alex Plank and Yellow Sneaker Media, LLC
Alex Plank  Aspie Affection 

Terms of Service - You must read this as a user of Wrong Planet

RSS Feed Add to Google Add to My Yahoo!

Subscribe: Wrong Planet News  Wrong Planet Forums

Privacy Policy

Asperger's is not a disease

fine art