6. Fermat's Little Theorem and Wilson's Theorem
Lemma: Suppose that (a,m)=1, then the least residues of ka for k=1,…,m−1 are a permutation of 0,1,…,m−1.
Proof) There are m−1 numbers in Z/mZ that is not congruent to 0. Let ka and k′a be two numbers with 1≤k,k′≤m−1, then we have (k−k′)a≡0 implies that (k−k′)≡0 as (a,m)=1, however because −m<k−k′<m, we see that k=k′. Hence there cannot be two different k,k′ with different least residue.
Thoerem (Fermat's Little Theorem): If p is prime and (a,p)=1, then
ap−1≡1 (mod p)
Proof) Given any p, a prime, we know that (a,p)=1. Hence
a,2a,…,(p−1)a
all have different least residues which would be 1,…,p−1. If we multiply them together,
(p−1)!≡ap−1(p−1)!
as (a,l)=1 for l=1,…,p−1, we may conclude that ap−1≡1 (mod p).
Easy application of Fermat's Little Theorem would be,
Corollary: If p is a prime, then
ap≡a (mod p)
Proof) If (a,p)=1, then multiply a on both side from Fermat's little theorem. If (a,p)=p, then this shouls that 0≡0.
Lemma: x2≡1 (mod p) has exactly two solutions: 1 and p−1.
Proof) We want to find least residues satisfying the above equation. Then we have p|x2−1, i.e. p|x−1 for p|x+1 for 0≤x≤p−1. we can clearly see that 1 and p−1 are the only solutions.
Lemma: Let p be an odd prime and r be the solution of ax≡1 (mod p) for a=1,…,p−1, (respectively, s a solution to bx≡1 (mod p) then r′≡s′ (mod p) if and only if a≡b (mod p). Furthermore, a≡a′ if and only if a=1 or p−1.
Proof) a≡bb′a≡ba′a≡b. Converse works the same way. The rest follows from lemma above.
Theorem (Wilson's Theorem): p is a prime if and only if
(p−1)!≡−1( mod p)
Proof) We have (p−3)/2 pairs such that when multiplied together, they become 1 modulo p. Hence (p−2)!≡1, hence (p−1)!≡p−1≡−1 (mod p). Conversely, if we assume n is composite, then n=ab for 1<a,b<n, then we have
a|n|(n−1)!+1
But clearly, we know that a|(n−1)!, hence it follows that a|1, giving a contradiction.
Equivalence relation: Let R be a set, then an equivalence relation is a subset E of R×R, where a∼b if (a,b)∈E satisfying the following property:
1) a∼a (Reflexive)
2) a∼b, then b∼a (Symmetry)
3) a∼b and b∼c, then a∼c (Transitive)
Partition: A partition of set R is subsets {Pi}i∈I such that
1) ⋃i∈IPi=R
2) Pi∩Pj=∅
For any equivalence relationship, we can define a subset of R [a]∼ to be the equivalence class defined as
[a]∼:={b∈R | a∼b}
Then we have the following relationship between equivalence relationship,
Theorem: Given a partition {Pi}i∈I of R, define a relation ∼ by a∼b if a,b∈Pi for some i∈I, then ∼ is an equivalence relationship with Pi as the equivalence classes. Conversely, distinct equivalence classes of ∼ of R defines a partition of R.
Lagrange's Theorem: Let G be a group and H a subgroup of G. Let x∼y be defined if x−y∈H, then this defines an equivalence relation on G. Let {xα} be one element from each equivalence classes, then we have the following
G=⋁i∈IxiH
If G is finite, and [G:H] denote the index of G and H, then we have [G:{e}]=[G:H][H:{e}], hence [G:H]∣|G|.
By Lagrange's theorem, the order of an element divides the order of the group, the multiplicative group of Z/pZ which has p−1 elements, gives ap−1=1 in the group, hence the Fermat's little theorem.
Comments
Post a Comment