wu :: forums
« wu :: forums - A MODULAR PROBLEM »

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register.
Nov 26th, 2024, 8:44am

RIDDLES SITE WRITE MATH! Home Home Help Help Search Search Members Members Login Login Register Register
   wu :: forums
   riddles
   hard
(Moderators: SMQ, Eigenray, Icarus, Grimbal, william wu, towr, ThudnBlunder)
   A MODULAR PROBLEM
« Previous topic | Next topic »
Pages: 1  Reply Reply Notify of replies Notify of replies Send Topic Send Topic Print Print
   Author  Topic: A MODULAR PROBLEM  (Read 926 times)
pcbouhid
Uberpuzzler
*****





   
Email

Gender: male
Posts: 647
A MODULAR PROBLEM  
« on: Nov 25th, 2005, 6:26am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Find the smallest positive integer x such that 2^x  = 3 (mod x).
IP Logged

Don´t follow me, I´m lost too.
JohanC
Senior Riddler
****





   


Posts: 460
Re: A MODULAR PROBLEM  
« Reply #1 on: Nov 25th, 2005, 6:49am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

The two first solutions I can find are
 4700063497 and 8365386194032363.
 
I have the impression that you only know the answer because it was written down somewhere, as there is no simple algorithm to find them.
IP Logged
pcbouhid
Uberpuzzler
*****





   
Email

Gender: male
Posts: 647
Re: A MODULAR PROBLEM  
« Reply #2 on: Nov 25th, 2005, 8:54am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Agree with you, JC.
IP Logged

Don´t follow me, I´m lost too.
rmsgrey
Uberpuzzler
*****





134688278 134688278   rmsgrey   rmsgrey


Gender: male
Posts: 2873
Re: A MODULAR PROBLEM  
« Reply #3 on: Nov 26th, 2005, 4:38am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

How about   1   and   2   ?
 
OK, arguments could be made for them not being valid, but you can also argue the converse.
IP Logged
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
*****



Some people are average, some are just mean.

   


Gender: male
Posts: 13730
Re: A MODULAR PROBLEM  
« Reply #4 on: Nov 26th, 2005, 2:06pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Nov 26th, 2005, 4:38am, rmsgrey wrote:
How about   1   and   2   ?
 
OK, arguments could be made for them not being valid, but you can also argue the converse.
I can see arguments for the first, but not for the second..
IP Logged

Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
rmsgrey
Uberpuzzler
*****





134688278 134688278   rmsgrey   rmsgrey


Gender: male
Posts: 2873
Re: A MODULAR PROBLEM  
« Reply #5 on: Nov 27th, 2005, 8:12am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Nor can I now that I've remembered how to do simple arithmetic...
« Last Edit: Nov 27th, 2005, 8:14am by rmsgrey » IP Logged
JohanC
Senior Riddler
****





   


Posts: 460
Re: A MODULAR PROBLEM  
« Reply #6 on: Nov 27th, 2005, 12:37pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Here's the straightforward algorithm to find the solution:
1) calculate some values of (2^N)mod N and try to find a pattern
2) as no pattern shows up, enter the list of numbers at the Online Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences:
http://www.research.att.com/~njas/sequences/
3) this returns sequence A015910, with the answer to the question as well as to some related references and websites
4) lookup 4700063497 via Google, which leads to more websites such as
http://www.primepuzzles.net/puzzles/puzz_149.htm
which explains some history around the problem, and the fact that it is still not known for certain which is the second smallest number satisfying the equation
 
IP Logged
Icarus
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
*****



Boldly going where even angels fear to tread.

   


Gender: male
Posts: 4863
Re: A MODULAR PROBLEM  
« Reply #7 on: Nov 27th, 2005, 12:53pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Nov 27th, 2005, 12:37pm, JohanC wrote:
...it is still not known for certain which is the second smallest number satisfying the equation

 
Is there something wrong with your 8365386194032363? or are they just not know if it is 2nd?
IP Logged

"Pi goes on and on and on ...
And e is just as cursed.
I wonder: Which is larger
When their digits are reversed? " - Anonymous
JohanC
Senior Riddler
****





   


Posts: 460
Re: A MODULAR PROBLEM  
« Reply #8 on: Nov 27th, 2005, 2:16pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Nov 27th, 2005, 12:53pm, Icarus wrote:

 
Is there something wrong with your 8365386194032363? or are they just not know if it is 2nd?

 
Hi, Icarus,
8365386194032363 satisfies the equation, but it is unknown whether there exist other smaller solutions.
Just checking whether it satisfies is not straightforward, as 2^8365386194032363 has an enormous amount of digits.
 
The method is somewhat explained at
http://134.129.111.8/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0009&L=nmbrthry&O=D&am p;P=2355
 
By the way, only one more solution is known. It has 65 digits:
63130707451134435989380140059866138830623361447484274774099906755  
 
This one is elaborated at
http://listserv.nodak.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind9906&L=NMBRTHRY&P =1753
IP Logged
NickH
Senior Riddler
****





   
WWW

Gender: male
Posts: 341
Re: A MODULAR PROBLEM  
« Reply #9 on: Nov 29th, 2005, 12:47pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

See also this thread.
« Last Edit: Nov 29th, 2005, 12:51pm by NickH » IP Logged

Nick's Mathematical Puzzles
Pages: 1  Reply Reply Notify of replies Notify of replies Send Topic Send Topic Print Print

« Previous topic | Next topic »

Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.4!
Forum software copyright © 2000-2004 Yet another Bulletin Board