Chapter 1: Q11E (page 48)
Is divisible by ?
Short Answer
Both the numbers are divisible by .
/*! This file is auto-generated */ .wp-block-button__link{color:#fff;background-color:#32373c;border-radius:9999px;box-shadow:none;text-decoration:none;padding:calc(.667em + 2px) calc(1.333em + 2px);font-size:1.125em}.wp-block-file__button{background:#32373c;color:#fff;text-decoration:none}
Learning Materials
Features
Discover
Chapter 1: Q11E (page 48)
Is divisible by ?
Both the numbers are divisible by .
All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.
Get started for free
Wilson's theorem says that a numberis prime if and only if
.
(a) If is prime, then we know every number is invertible modulo . Which of thesenumbers is their own inverse?
(b) By pairing up multiplicative inverses, show thatrole="math" localid="1658725109805" for prime p.
(c) Show that if N is not prime, then .(Hint: Consider
(d) Unlike Fermat's Little Theorem, Wilson's theorem is an if-and-only-if condition for primality. Why can't we immediately base a primality test on this rule?
The algorithm for computing by repeated squaring does not necessarily lead to the minimum number of multiplications. Give an example of where the exponentiation can be performed using fewer multiplications, by some other method.
Consider the problem of computing x y for given integers x and y: we want the whole answer, not modulo a third integer. We know two algorithms for doing this: the iterative algorithm which performs y − 1 multiplications by x; and the recursive algorithm based on the binary expansion of y. Compare the time requirements of these two algorithms, assuming that the time to multiply an n-bit number by an m-bit number is O(mn).
Starting from the definition of (namely, that divides ), justify the substitution rule ,and also the corresponding rule for multiplication.
Find the inverse of:.
What do you think about this solution?
We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.