Boi
New member
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2023
- Messages
- 30
First things first: I have posted my proof here because I don't know where to post questions about number theory. What I needed to proof definitely wasn't an advanced math theorem; just a simple task from an old book of mine.
Prove that the smallest number natural number e, satisfying the equation ae≡1(modp), must divide (p-1).
My proof:
Suppose the opposite: we assume that e is the smallest natural number satisfying ae≡1(modp) (later I will not write mod p) but it does not divide (p−1). Then, we can say p−1=ke+r, where 0<r<e. By Fermat's Little Theorem, it must be true that ake+r≡1 or 1) (ae)k∗ar≡1. By our assumption, ae≡1, which also means that (ae)k≡1. Knowing this, we can rewrite 1) as ar≡1. We definitely know r=0 and r<e. We've just arrived at contradiction: e was assumed to be the smallest natural number satisfying our equation but we just have found a smaller one. So, e must divide (p−1).
Prove that the smallest number natural number e, satisfying the equation ae≡1(modp), must divide (p-1).
My proof:
Suppose the opposite: we assume that e is the smallest natural number satisfying ae≡1(modp) (later I will not write mod p) but it does not divide (p−1). Then, we can say p−1=ke+r, where 0<r<e. By Fermat's Little Theorem, it must be true that ake+r≡1 or 1) (ae)k∗ar≡1. By our assumption, ae≡1, which also means that (ae)k≡1. Knowing this, we can rewrite 1) as ar≡1. We definitely know r=0 and r<e. We've just arrived at contradiction: e was assumed to be the smallest natural number satisfying our equation but we just have found a smaller one. So, e must divide (p−1).