I am trying to understand why the procedure for solving congruence equations with the CRT works.
An example from my notes is:
$$x^2 + 1 \equiv 0 \text{ mod 10}$$
We do this problem by considering the solutions to the two congruence equations $x^2 + 1 \equiv 0 \text{ mod 2 }$ and $x^2 + 1 \equiv 0 \text{ mod 5 }$. I don't have a problem doing the rote calculation, but I'm not quite getting why this works.
Specifically, is it true that if $x$ is a solution to $x^2 + 1 \equiv 0 \text{ mod 2}$, and $x^2 + 1 \equiv 0 \text{ mod 5}$, is it necessarily a solution to $x^2 + 1 \equiv 0 \text{ mod 10}$? I can see why the converse is true, but not this way.
Because the procedure, for example, for finding one solution to the original congruence equation is to note that $(x \equiv 1 \text{ mod 2}, x \equiv 3 \text{ mod 5)}$ is a solution to the simultaneous congruence equation: $x^2 + 1 \equiv 0 \text{ mod 2 }$ and $x^2 + 1 \equiv 0 \text{ mod 5}$. But then I don't see how we can conclude that this will be a solution to our original equation?*
*Note: I know by the CRT the simultaneous solution to $(x \equiv 1 \text{ mod 2}, x \equiv 3 \text{ mod 5)}$ is necessarily a congruence class in $\mathbb{Z}_{10}$, I just don't see how we know for certain it will satisfy the congruence equation $x^2 + 1 \equiv 0 \text{ mod 10}$.