2

I know you need to use the Division Algorithm but I don't know where to start.

Mike Rett
  • 41

3 Answers3

3

You know that $a^{p-1} = 1 \pmod{p}$. So $k$ is certainly at most $p-1$.

Now do division with remainder to get $(p-1) = qk + r$ with $0 \le r <k$. You need to show $r=0$.

Then $a^{p-1} = a^{qk +r} = (a^k)^q a^r$. Now use $a^{p-1}$ and $a^k$ are $1$ modulo $p$ to get $a^r$ is also $1$ modulo $p$, and continue from there.

quid
  • 42,135
  • So when a^p-1=(a^k)^q(a^r) you can divide both sides by a^k and get 1=(1^q)(a^r) since a^p-1=a^k. Then since 1^q will be 1 for any q we can rewrite it as 1=a^r and for this equation to be satisfied r must be equal to 0. Thus,(going back to the division algorithm), there is no remainder when k divides (p-1). – Mike Rett Mar 21 '15 at 21:18
  • Almost. You do not really divide by $a^k$ but rather plug $a^k =1$ (which you know by assumption) and $a^{p-1}= 1$ which you know by Fermat little, to have, as you write, $1 = 1^q a^r$ so $a^r=1$. (Everything modulo $p$ of course.) And, yes, as you say this implies $r= 0$ as $r < k$ and $k$ is by assumption smallest positive with $a^k = 1$ so $r$ cannot be positive, whence it is $0$. – quid Mar 21 '15 at 22:19
2

Let $k$ be the smallest positive integer for which $a^k \equiv 1 \bmod p$.

By Fermat Little Theorem, $k\le p-1$. If $k=p-1$, we are done, otherwise find the largest multiple of $k, jk$ that is less than $p-1$.

Now let $m=(p-1)-jk \le k$. If $m=k$ then $(j+1)k = p-1$ and we are done. Otherwise if $m<k$ then since we have $a^{p-1} \equiv 1 $ and $a^{jk} \equiv 1^j \equiv 1 \bmod p$, then also $a^m \equiv 1 \bmod p$, which contradicts our definition of $k$.

Therefore $k$ divides $p-1$.

Joffan
  • 39,627
1

A slight amount of abstraction lends further insight to the innate arithmetical structure.

The set $\,\cal O\,$ of integers $\rm\:n >0\:$ such that $\rm\:a^n \equiv 1\:$ is closed under positive subtraction, i.e.

$$\rm \color{#0A0}n>\color{#C00}m\,\in\,{\cal O}\ \Rightarrow\ 1\equiv \color{#0A0}{a^n} \equiv a^{n-m}\, \color{#C00}{a^m} \equiv a^{n-m}\, \Rightarrow\ n\!-\!m\,\in\,{\cal O}\qquad $$

So, by the theorem below, every element of $\rm\,\cal O\,$ is divisible by its least element $\rm\:\ell\ \! $ := order of $\rm\,a.$

Theorem $\ \ $ If a nonempty set of positive integers $\rm\,\cal O\,$ satisfies $\rm\ n > m\, \in\, {\cal O} \ \Rightarrow\ n\!-\!m\, \in\, \cal O$
then every element of $\rm\,\cal O\,$ is a multiple of the least element $\rm\:\ell \in\cal O.$

Proof $\ {\bf 1}\ $ If not there's a least nonmultiple $\rm\:n\in \cal O,\:$ contra $\rm\:n\!-\!\ell \in \cal O\:$ is a nonmultiple of $\rm\:\ell. \, $

Proof ${\bf\ 2}\,\rm\ \ \cal O\,$ closed under subtraction $\rm\,\Rightarrow\,\cal O\,$ closed under remainder (mod), when it is $\ne 0,$ since mod may be computed by repeated subtraction: $\rm\, a\ mod\ b\, =\, a - k b\, =\, a-b-b-\cdots -b.\,$ Thus $\rm\,n\in \cal O\,$ $\Rightarrow$ $\rm\, (n\ mod\ \ell) = 0,\,$ else it is $\rm\,\in \cal O\,$ and smaller than $\rm\,\ell,\,$ contra mimimality of $\rm\,\ell.$

Remark $\ $ In a nutshell, two applications of induction yield the following inferences

$ \rm\begin{eqnarray} {\cal O}\ closed\ under\ {\bf subtraction}\! &\Rightarrow\:&\rm {\cal O}\ closed\ under\ {\bf mod} = remainder = repeated\ subtraction \\ &\Rightarrow\:&\rm {\cal O}\ closed\ under\ {\bf gcd} = repeated\ mod\ (Euclid's\ algorithm) \end{eqnarray}$

Interpreted constructively, this yields the extended Euclidean algorithm for the gcd.

For more on the key innate structure see this post on order ideals and denominator ideals.

Community
  • 1
Bill Dubuque
  • 272,048