Number Theory | Solving Quadratic Congruences with Hensel's Lemma

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 19 янв 2025

Комментарии • 36

  • @emanuellandeholm5657
    @emanuellandeholm5657 4 года назад +22

    This is an amazing problem/solution. Especially when you consider all the 2^3 solutions. Me, I would just brute force it in python.

  • @asklar
    @asklar 4 года назад +17

    at 12:47 you say 5*45*7 but it's actually 5*45*1 (multiply by the choice of x, not the mod base). 1163 is the right result though.

    • @trentrylan882
      @trentrylan882 3 года назад

      i know I'm pretty randomly asking but does anyone know a good place to watch newly released movies online?

  • @georgesadler7830
    @georgesadler7830 3 года назад +1

    Professor Michael Penn, I really understand this lecture from start to finish. This is solid mathematics.

  • @giuseppebassi7406
    @giuseppebassi7406 3 года назад +8

    A better method: divide it in a system of congruences mod 5, 7 and 9. Then rewrite in these forms:
    For mod 5: x^2+3x+2=(x+2)(x+1)=0, x=3 or 4
    For mod 7: x^2+3x-4=(x+4)(x-1)=o, x=1 or 3
    For mod 9: x^2+3x-10=(x+5)(x-2)=0, x=2 or 4.
    Then solve then system of congruences in these 6 cases. With a bit cleverness we have not to use 6 times chinese method, it’s much simpler

  • @Eldooodarino
    @Eldooodarino 4 года назад +8

    At 13:49 you say there are 7 other solutions but only show 6. Isn't 164 also a solution? 164^2+3 x 164 + 17 = 27405 = 87x 315 = 0 mod(315)

    • @asklar
      @asklar 4 года назад +2

      yes

  • @idrisseahamadiabdallah7669
    @idrisseahamadiabdallah7669 5 лет назад +20

    Thanks Very much, but I think in the last operation of calculating the sum , instead of the last 7 we should write 1.

    • @MichaelPennMath
      @MichaelPennMath  5 лет назад +13

      You are totally right, thanks for catching that!

    • @idrisseahamadiabdallah7669
      @idrisseahamadiabdallah7669 5 лет назад +1

      you, thank you, I understood from your video and I did well in today's exam. good luck.

    • @idrisseahamadiabdallah7669
      @idrisseahamadiabdallah7669 5 лет назад +1

      @@MichaelPennMath you, thank you, I understood from your video and I did well in today's exam. good luck.

  • @mackenziekelly1148
    @mackenziekelly1148 4 года назад +9

    You said there weren't really any tricks, but your polynomial for 0 (mod 5) was already factorable into (x+2)(x+1), which give you -2, -1 --> 3, 4. Then for the mod 7 polynomial you could have changed 17 to -4 then factored into (x+4)(x-1) giving you 1, -4 --> 1, 3.

    • @tomatrix7525
      @tomatrix7525 3 года назад +1

      Yeah, but the modulo you are working with is so low it much of a muchness

    • @mackenziekelly1148
      @mackenziekelly1148 3 года назад +8

      @@tomatrix7525I don't understand your comment

  • @mryip06
    @mryip06 2 года назад +2

    Any more information on gcd(3,f'(1))? Thank yoy very much.

  • @digxx
    @digxx 3 года назад +2

    I did 1 after I realized you had 2^3 combinations and thought fuck it for the other 7... too much work.

  • @mrl9418
    @mrl9418 4 года назад +3

    Let us ponder the non-UFDness of Z_(315) [X] :
    x^2 + 3x + 17 is the product of 4 distinct couples of polynomials

  • @pierregodin1063
    @pierregodin1063 Год назад

    Merci!

  • @mathematics_and_energetics
    @mathematics_and_energetics 8 месяцев назад

    Awesome, dear Michael! 🥳🥳🥳

  • @NilodeRoock
    @NilodeRoock 2 года назад +1

    I noticed the error at 07:00 f'(2) = 4 ?? but luckily it resolved itself. ;-) - It is very important for your overall aura and reputation that you don't watch at the cheat-sheets all the time. ;-)

    • @rainerzufall42
      @rainerzufall42 Год назад +2

      My theory is, that he omitted 3 (mod 3) and just calculated 2 * 2 (mod 3) for the derivative. But it doesn't matter (mod 3), if you take 4 or 7!

    • @NilodeRoock
      @NilodeRoock Год назад +1

      @@rainerzufall42 Man, I waited a year for this. ;-)

  • @رياضياتتوجيهيوجامعةأ.عبدالرحمن

    When the polinomail congruence has no solution؟

    • @mehdimarashi1736
      @mehdimarashi1736 2 года назад

      Think x^2 = 2 (mod 3). It does not have any solutions, x^2 is only congruent to either 0 or 1. We should be able to make a table and show that there are no solutions where we are working mod a small number. For working mod a large prime, I can't think of a better solution, though.

  • @JumaHamad-in4tq
    @JumaHamad-in4tq 7 месяцев назад

    2. Find all values of x in the congruence x² = q(mod p), where p is a prime number, given
    (i) q = 15 p = 967
    (ii) * q = 14, p = 941 . how to solve this problem

  • @singious
    @singious Месяц назад

    It's amazing. I tried another calculation using Matlab.

  • @DilipKumar-ns2kl
    @DilipKumar-ns2kl 3 года назад

    Chinese remainder theorem is lengthy and uneasy to handle.
    Instead use the following formula for this problem.
    Let x=x(1) mod(5), x=x(2) mod(7) and
    x=x(3) mod(9).
    x(1)=3,4 x(2)=1,3 x(3)=2,4
    Formula:-
    x=126x(1)+225x(2)+280x(3) mod(315)
    All the 8 solns follow for different values of x(1), x(2) & x(3).

  • @PunmasterSTP
    @PunmasterSTP 3 года назад

    Biceps and now quads!? jk but in all seriousness, thank you so much for making all of these wonderful videos!

  • @essbeevanhoutte4095
    @essbeevanhoutte4095 Год назад

    Awesome thanks

  • @mcoc8197
    @mcoc8197 3 года назад +1

    What is mod

    • @PunmasterSTP
      @PunmasterSTP 3 года назад

      "mod" stands for the modulo operation ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modulo_operation ). I'd highly recommend starting at the beginning of this playlist and watching the videos in order ( ruclips.net/p/PL22w63XsKjqwAgBzVFVqZNMcVKpOOAA7c ).

  • @ghayyursafdar518
    @ghayyursafdar518 3 года назад

    If we see board clear than may be this video will helpful but unfortunately wording which shows at screen is much disturbing by seen board

    • @aweebthatlovesmath4220
      @aweebthatlovesmath4220 2 года назад

      This video is for 3 years ago now quality of his video is so much better.