-1

As a simple case take $k=2, a\equiv b\pmod {p^2}\implies a\equiv b\pmod p.$
A constructive example for $a= 2, b=27, p =5$ will work, but needed is a general or non-constructive approach, so as to get the reasoning applicable generally in a formal manner.

I mean the reason for the no change in residue class, for a root of the modulus is not clear.

I can only work out the case when $a , b \lt p$, as it is the trivial case (with $a=b$) for the smaller modulus case.

jitender
  • 707
  • 1
    What could possibly be "non-constructive" about a proof of this (which just amounts to noting that $p\mid p^k$)? – Angina Seng Feb 15 '18 at 07:07
  • 1
    I wonder what you think "non-construction proof" means. – fleablood Feb 15 '18 at 07:09
  • @LordSharktheUnknown For me your statement is a non-constructive proof, in a verbal manner. – jitender Feb 15 '18 at 07:09
  • @fleablood One that does not take only an example to prove for failure or success, but takes an algebraic or symbolic approach. – jitender Feb 15 '18 at 07:10
  • 1
    This is trivial. If $p^2|a-b $ and $p|p^2$ then $p|a-b $. p doesn't have to be prime and we don't have to square it. If $a\equiv b \mod nk $ then $a\equiv b\mod n $. I'm pretty sure you prove that last week. – fleablood Feb 15 '18 at 07:13
  • @fleablood Thanks, but last week it was for $a\equiv b \pmod n \implies a^i \equiv b^i \pmod n$. And I harped on the derivation of the second equality/expression from the original one, and your argument was that it does not matter how the second expression is derived from the first. – jitender Feb 15 '18 at 07:15
  • 1
    I was talking more about a basic prove that if $a|b$ and $b|c $ then $a|c $. This question is absolutely the exact same. – fleablood Feb 15 '18 at 07:20
  • @fleablood Sorry for not being able to detect that it is the same case of transitive property of division. – jitender Feb 15 '18 at 07:22
  • I don't think "constructive" means what you think it means. – Thomas Andrews Feb 15 '18 at 09:43
  • @ThomasAndrews Please help me find fault with my understanding of 'constructive proof', by elaborating. – jitender Feb 15 '18 at 12:47

2 Answers2

1

$$a \equiv b \pmod{p^k}$$

$$a-b \equiv 0 \pmod{p^k}$$

$$\exists m \in \mathbb{Z}, (a-b) =p^km$$

$$\exists m \in \mathbb{Z}, (a-b) =p(p^{k-1}m)$$

$$a-b \equiv 0 \pmod{p}$$

Siong Thye Goh
  • 149,520
  • 20
  • 88
  • 149
  • Thanks a lot. I request that the failure for the converse case be proved by such (non-constructive) approach. I mean that given $a\equiv b \pmod {p} \nrightarrow a \equiv b \pmod {p^k}$. – jitender Feb 15 '18 at 07:18
  • scratch head, to disprove it, I just need a counter example... I dont get what is non-constructive. – Siong Thye Goh Feb 15 '18 at 07:21
  • I mean that there should be an algebraic proof, but as in converse the hypothesis and conclusion are exchanged; and given the implication in the original - so, assuming hypothesis is H, conclusion is C; we have originally: $\lnot H \cup C$, and for converse, it is: $\lnot C \cup H$. $H: a\equiv b \pmod {p^k}$, $C: a\equiv \pmod p$. So, have: $\lnot (a\equiv b \pmod p) \cup H$. And need to prove it false, as a general case. Also, $\exists k \in \mathbb{Z}, a \equiv b \pmod p \implies (a-b) = kp$ – jitender Feb 15 '18 at 07:34
  • $p \equiv 0 \pmod{p}$ but $p \not \equiv 0 \pmod{p^k}, k>1$. – Siong Thye Goh Feb 15 '18 at 07:39
  • I hope yours is till a constructive example, just not using an actual value to substitute for. May be I am wrong, as if a general case is taken then it is non-constructive. Confused. But, one thing is certain that it is still showing a counter-case. – jitender Feb 15 '18 at 07:42
  • Please help with an EDITED version of the proof for converse case at below hyperlink address, and help as it is stuck: https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/2651730/prove-for-a-prime-p-forall-l-in-mathbb-z-a-equiv-b-pmod-p-nrightarrow – jitender Feb 15 '18 at 16:26
1

If $a|b $ and $b|c $ then $a|c $. (Because if there exist $k $ so that $b=a*k $ and if there is a $m $ so that $c=b*m$, then $c=a (k*m) $

So if $a\equiv b\mod p^2$ that means $p^2|a-b $. And since $p|p^2$ we know $p|a-b $

fleablood
  • 124,253