I know that Fermat's Little Theorem states that if p is prime and 1<a<p, then ap−1≡1(mod p).
I also know that a Fermat Liar is any a such that an−1≡1(mod n), when n is composite.
I feel that these two points could be relevant to a question I'm trying to solve, which asks me to show that if n=2p−1, where p is prime, then 2n−1≡1(mod n).
However, I'm not sure exactly how to use the information I have gathered to form an explanation. Some help would be appreciated!
Answer
In general, the way that Fermat liars appear is as follows: if x has multiplicative order a modulo n, and a∣n−1, then x^a \equiv 1 \pmod n \implies (x^a)^{(n-1)/a} \equiv 1 \pmod n \implies x^{n-1} \equiv 1 \pmod n. In particular, in the case of Carmichael numbers, \phi(n) \mid n-1, so we always have a \mid n-1 whenever \gcd(x,n)=1.
If n = 2^p-1, then 2^p \equiv 1 \pmod n, which tells us that 2 has multiplicative order p modulo n. (In general, we'd only know that 2 has multiplicative order some divisor of p, but here p is prime.) We'll get 2^{n-1} \equiv 1 \pmod n if p \mid n-1.
But p \mid n-1 is saying that p \mid 2^p-2, which is precisely the statement of Fermat's little theorem: 2^p \equiv 2 \pmod p. So we are guaranteed that p \mid n-1, and 2^{n-1} = (2^p)^{(n-1)/p} \equiv 1^{(n-1)/p} = 1 \pmod n.
No comments:
Post a Comment