Browse Groups

(5)
• NextPrevious
• ... Woh! Steady on, Jon. You re _way_ off base here. 2 is not coprime to 30. gcd(2,30)=2 3 is not coprime to 30. gcd(3,30)=3 5 is not coprime to 30.
Message 1 of 5 , Mar 1, 2003
View Source
--- Jon Perry <perry@...> wrote:
> 'Suppose that: the Tn is a complete set of residues prime to mn, the least
> number more than 1 in this set U(Tn) is the n-th prime pn. The number of
> elements of the set Tn is | Tn |=(p1-1)*(P2-1)*...*(p[n-1]-1). If p>p[n-1]
> is a prime, then p belongs the class of residues Tn mod mn.'
>
> I don't get this. mn is defined as "Let mn=p0*p1*...p[n-1]", therefore
> m2=2.3=6 and m3=2.3.5=30
>
> However, the number of residues prime to 30 is
> |{2,3,5,7,11,13,17,19,23,29}|=10, and not the 8 predicted by Liu. I suppose
> the p>3 property comes into play...

Woh! Steady on, Jon. You're _way_ off base here.

2 is not coprime to 30. gcd(2,30)=2
3 is not coprime to 30. gcd(3,30)=3
5 is not coprime to 30. gcd(5,30)=5

1 is coprime to 30. gcd(1,30)=1

|{1,7,11,13,17,19,23,29}| = 8 as correctly stated by Liu.

And Liu was not "predicting", this isn't reading chicken entrails, it's a
simple mathematical fact.

Phil

=====
"Only an admission that he does possess weapons of mass destruction
would do, sources said: 'The rest is just gesture politics." -- Hoon

"Are you still bombing your wife?" -- Winjer

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
• Woh! Steady on, Jon. You re _way_ off base here. 2 is not coprime to 30. gcd(2,30)=2 3 is not coprime to 30. gcd(3,30)=3 5 is not coprime to 30. gcd(5,30)=5 1
Message 1 of 5 , Mar 1, 2003
View Source
'Woh! Steady on, Jon. You're _way_ off base here.

2 is not coprime to 30. gcd(2,30)=2
3 is not coprime to 30. gcd(3,30)=3
5 is not coprime to 30. gcd(5,30)=5

1 is coprime to 30. gcd(1,30)=1

|{1,7,11,13,17,19,23,29}| = 8 as correctly stated by Liu.'

Correct. As the whole page in question
(http://www.primepuzzles.net/problems/prob_037.htm) is completely littered
with typos and misleading nomenclature, I don't feel completely aggrieved at
having made such a simple error.

As to what 'Tn mod mn is equivalent to the class of residues
Tn+<0,1,2,...,pn=1>*<mn> mod m[n+1]'

T_n mod m_n is equivalent to the class of residues
Tn+(<0,1,2,...,pn-1>*<mn>) mod m_(n+1)

which comes clear if you look at the examples, except for m_n is incorrectly
defined.

Jon Perry
perry@...
http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~perry/maths/
BrainBench MVP for HTML and JavaScript
http://www.brainbench.com
• Thanks a lot for your responses. What I am confused about is that I don t understand how adding * to Tn makes it equivalent mod m[n+1].
Message 1 of 5 , Mar 1, 2003
View Source
Thanks a lot for your responses. What I am confused about is that I
don't understand how adding <0,1,2,...,pn-1>*<mn> to Tn makes it
equivalent mod m[n+1]. What I would like is a theorem like the one
that one can uset to prove that if (k,S)=1 and S is a reduced
residue system then so is k*S. I think it should be obvious since
most people accept it and I see from examples that it is true, but I
just want to know what theorem he is using to imply this equivalence
or if it follows directly from the definition of Tn. Any help will
be greatly appreciated.
Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.
• Changes have not been saved
Press OK to abandon changes or Cancel to continue editing
• Your browser is not supported
Kindly note that Groups does not support 7.0 or earlier versions of Internet Explorer. We recommend upgrading to the latest Internet Explorer, Google Chrome, or Firefox. If you are using IE 9 or later, make sure you turn off Compatibility View.