Do the parenthesis around modulo matter
$begingroup$
Wiki says:
"...denoted ${displaystyle aequiv b{pmod {n}}.}$
(some authors use $=$ instead of $≡$ ; in this case, if the parentheses are omitted, this generally means that "mod" denotes the modulo operation, that is, that $0 ≤ a < n$)"
Do the parenthesis around mod matter? What it sounds like to me is weather or not three or two lines are used if mod isn't in parenthesis it's an operation. If so then why do we have to distinguish between $equiv$ and $=$?
modular-arithmetic
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Wiki says:
"...denoted ${displaystyle aequiv b{pmod {n}}.}$
(some authors use $=$ instead of $≡$ ; in this case, if the parentheses are omitted, this generally means that "mod" denotes the modulo operation, that is, that $0 ≤ a < n$)"
Do the parenthesis around mod matter? What it sounds like to me is weather or not three or two lines are used if mod isn't in parenthesis it's an operation. If so then why do we have to distinguish between $equiv$ and $=$?
modular-arithmetic
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
In my experience, mathematicians rarely use "mod" as an infix binary operation in mathematical writing. Generally the parentheses are not necessary but they aid clarity a little, especially in complicated modular relationships. If $=$ is used rather than $equiv$ then you should think about whether mod might be a binary operation.
$endgroup$
– Ian
Dec 26 '18 at 13:52
$begingroup$
@Ian Operational mod is common in some mathematical contexts, e,g. see my answer.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 26 '18 at 17:30
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Wiki says:
"...denoted ${displaystyle aequiv b{pmod {n}}.}$
(some authors use $=$ instead of $≡$ ; in this case, if the parentheses are omitted, this generally means that "mod" denotes the modulo operation, that is, that $0 ≤ a < n$)"
Do the parenthesis around mod matter? What it sounds like to me is weather or not three or two lines are used if mod isn't in parenthesis it's an operation. If so then why do we have to distinguish between $equiv$ and $=$?
modular-arithmetic
$endgroup$
Wiki says:
"...denoted ${displaystyle aequiv b{pmod {n}}.}$
(some authors use $=$ instead of $≡$ ; in this case, if the parentheses are omitted, this generally means that "mod" denotes the modulo operation, that is, that $0 ≤ a < n$)"
Do the parenthesis around mod matter? What it sounds like to me is weather or not three or two lines are used if mod isn't in parenthesis it's an operation. If so then why do we have to distinguish between $equiv$ and $=$?
modular-arithmetic
modular-arithmetic
edited Dec 26 '18 at 14:37
dmtri
1,5082521
1,5082521
asked Dec 26 '18 at 13:48
Benjamin ThoburnBenjamin Thoburn
350213
350213
$begingroup$
In my experience, mathematicians rarely use "mod" as an infix binary operation in mathematical writing. Generally the parentheses are not necessary but they aid clarity a little, especially in complicated modular relationships. If $=$ is used rather than $equiv$ then you should think about whether mod might be a binary operation.
$endgroup$
– Ian
Dec 26 '18 at 13:52
$begingroup$
@Ian Operational mod is common in some mathematical contexts, e,g. see my answer.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 26 '18 at 17:30
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In my experience, mathematicians rarely use "mod" as an infix binary operation in mathematical writing. Generally the parentheses are not necessary but they aid clarity a little, especially in complicated modular relationships. If $=$ is used rather than $equiv$ then you should think about whether mod might be a binary operation.
$endgroup$
– Ian
Dec 26 '18 at 13:52
$begingroup$
@Ian Operational mod is common in some mathematical contexts, e,g. see my answer.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 26 '18 at 17:30
$begingroup$
In my experience, mathematicians rarely use "mod" as an infix binary operation in mathematical writing. Generally the parentheses are not necessary but they aid clarity a little, especially in complicated modular relationships. If $=$ is used rather than $equiv$ then you should think about whether mod might be a binary operation.
$endgroup$
– Ian
Dec 26 '18 at 13:52
$begingroup$
In my experience, mathematicians rarely use "mod" as an infix binary operation in mathematical writing. Generally the parentheses are not necessary but they aid clarity a little, especially in complicated modular relationships. If $=$ is used rather than $equiv$ then you should think about whether mod might be a binary operation.
$endgroup$
– Ian
Dec 26 '18 at 13:52
$begingroup$
@Ian Operational mod is common in some mathematical contexts, e,g. see my answer.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 26 '18 at 17:30
$begingroup$
@Ian Operational mod is common in some mathematical contexts, e,g. see my answer.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 26 '18 at 17:30
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Mod is not an operation$^1$!
This is a cause of confusion for many students I have started adopting a new notation to clarify this $$17hspace {.1 cm}overset{displaystyle equiv}{tiny mod 5} hspace {.1 cm} 103 $$
The point is that $mod 5$ is something that modifies the equivalency and not one side or the other. It is no operation. The numbers $17$ and $103$ are in the same category if we are considering what their remainder is after we divide by $5$.
$1:$ Except when it is... The confusion here is that mod IS an operation whenever you talk to a computer scientist/programmer. It's just not an operation in the community of mathematicians.
To confuse the matter: Mathematicians also explore a mapping which is used in a slightly different way from these computer scientists/programmers. If you are interested you can read the comment thread below and I invite you to inquire.
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
The operational form $ abmod n, $ is also widely used by mathematicians.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 26 '18 at 14:11
1
$begingroup$
As an operation? You mean a mapping from $Ftimes F to F$? I think of $a mod n$ as mapping into $mathbb{Z}_n$. Which in my lexicon is not an "operation." You mean that mathematicians use $amod n$ to mean something like computer scientist/programmers saying $a % n$? I haven't seen this but I believe you. Oh. Ok you softened your comment to say "operational form." I am with you now.
$endgroup$
– Mason
Dec 26 '18 at 14:14
2
$begingroup$
Yes - see "operational". The attempt by some to denigrate the operational form as non-mathematical is incorrect and misguided. Don't believe everything you read on the web.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 26 '18 at 14:18
2
$begingroup$
@BillDubuque Not $100 %$ I am understanding what is meant by "operational." I mean it's a mapping into $mathbb{Z_n}$. No problem from me exploring this mapping $phi: mathbb{Z} to mathbb{Z_n}$ but in this case ( precisely as the OP hints at) we can say $phi(x) = phi(y)$ and put down the notation $equiv$. Maybe a more complete answer would take on this element of the story. I think I would wait for OP to clarify or respond before I dive deeper into this conversation.
$endgroup$
– Mason
Dec 26 '18 at 14:24
1
$begingroup$
Haha. Don't believe everything you read on the web!
$endgroup$
– Mason
Dec 26 '18 at 14:29
|
show 8 more comments
$begingroup$
Parentheses serve to disambiguate the variant notations when used as in the first expression below
$$begin{align}
&a, =, bbmod n\[.2em]
{rm is it} &a = (bbmod n) {rm i.e.} a, =, {rm remainder of} bdiv n\[.2em]
{rm or is it} &a = b!!!pmod{! n} {rm i.e.} n {rm divides} a-b
end{align}$$
Insisting on the parentheses in the final expression removes the ambiguity. Some authors also believe the ambiguity is removed be using a congruence vs. equal sign, i.e. $,aequiv bmod n, $ but, alas, beginners often wrongly interpret this in operational form (2nd form above), esp. if it written with less whitespace $,aequiv bbmod n.,$ Some authors never use the operational form, which does eliminate the ambiguity (but may still prove confusing for beginners who use multiple textbooks).
Remark $ $ Despite some remarks to the contrary, it is worth emphasis that the operational form of $!bmod!$ is widely used in number theory and algebra, e.g. it plays a crucial role in the descent step in the Euclidean gcd algorithm
$$ |a|ge |b|,Rightarrow, gcd(a,b) = gcd(abmod b,, b)$$
Similarly many (inductive) proofs and (recursive) algorithms in number theory and algebra are governed by an analogous (Euclidean) descent (via division with remainder). As such, it proves convenient to have notation for this ubiquitous remainder descent operation.
Also the notation enables expression of fundamental laws that might otherwise be greatly obfuscated. A nice example of this is the $!bmod!$ Distributive Law
$$ abbmod ac, =, a(bbmod c)$$
This can be viewed as an operational reformulation of CRT = Chinese Remainder Theorem. Being operational it often greatly simplifies computations. Here's a simple example from here
$$ 3^{large 1+2n}!bmod 12, =, 3(3^{large 2n}!bmod 4), =, 3((-1)^{large 2n}!bmod 4), =, 3$$
Below is another example employing polynomial congruences $ $ (equivalent to Lagrange interpolation). If $,f,$ satisfies congruences $ overbrace{fequiv 0pmod{x!+!2}}^{large f(-2) = 0 }, $ and $, overbrace{fequivcolor{#0a0}8pmod{x!-!2}}^{large f(2) = color{#0a0}8phantom{|^{|}} } $ then
$qquadqquad fbmod x^2!-!4,$ $=, (x!+!2)Bigg[dfrac{f}{x!+!2}bmod x!-!color{#c00}2Bigg]$ $ =, underbrace{(x!+!2)left[dfrac{f(color{#c00}{2})}{color{#c00}2!+!2}right] =, 2(x!+!2)}_{large fbmod x-color{#c00}2, =, f(color{#c00}{2}),, =, color{#0a0}8}$
Generally whenever one performs nontrivial calculation it often proves convenient to have notations for normal forms (such as canonical representatives of equivalence classes in quotient objects).
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3052950%2fdo-the-parenthesis-around-modulo-matter%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Mod is not an operation$^1$!
This is a cause of confusion for many students I have started adopting a new notation to clarify this $$17hspace {.1 cm}overset{displaystyle equiv}{tiny mod 5} hspace {.1 cm} 103 $$
The point is that $mod 5$ is something that modifies the equivalency and not one side or the other. It is no operation. The numbers $17$ and $103$ are in the same category if we are considering what their remainder is after we divide by $5$.
$1:$ Except when it is... The confusion here is that mod IS an operation whenever you talk to a computer scientist/programmer. It's just not an operation in the community of mathematicians.
To confuse the matter: Mathematicians also explore a mapping which is used in a slightly different way from these computer scientists/programmers. If you are interested you can read the comment thread below and I invite you to inquire.
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
The operational form $ abmod n, $ is also widely used by mathematicians.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 26 '18 at 14:11
1
$begingroup$
As an operation? You mean a mapping from $Ftimes F to F$? I think of $a mod n$ as mapping into $mathbb{Z}_n$. Which in my lexicon is not an "operation." You mean that mathematicians use $amod n$ to mean something like computer scientist/programmers saying $a % n$? I haven't seen this but I believe you. Oh. Ok you softened your comment to say "operational form." I am with you now.
$endgroup$
– Mason
Dec 26 '18 at 14:14
2
$begingroup$
Yes - see "operational". The attempt by some to denigrate the operational form as non-mathematical is incorrect and misguided. Don't believe everything you read on the web.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 26 '18 at 14:18
2
$begingroup$
@BillDubuque Not $100 %$ I am understanding what is meant by "operational." I mean it's a mapping into $mathbb{Z_n}$. No problem from me exploring this mapping $phi: mathbb{Z} to mathbb{Z_n}$ but in this case ( precisely as the OP hints at) we can say $phi(x) = phi(y)$ and put down the notation $equiv$. Maybe a more complete answer would take on this element of the story. I think I would wait for OP to clarify or respond before I dive deeper into this conversation.
$endgroup$
– Mason
Dec 26 '18 at 14:24
1
$begingroup$
Haha. Don't believe everything you read on the web!
$endgroup$
– Mason
Dec 26 '18 at 14:29
|
show 8 more comments
$begingroup$
Mod is not an operation$^1$!
This is a cause of confusion for many students I have started adopting a new notation to clarify this $$17hspace {.1 cm}overset{displaystyle equiv}{tiny mod 5} hspace {.1 cm} 103 $$
The point is that $mod 5$ is something that modifies the equivalency and not one side or the other. It is no operation. The numbers $17$ and $103$ are in the same category if we are considering what their remainder is after we divide by $5$.
$1:$ Except when it is... The confusion here is that mod IS an operation whenever you talk to a computer scientist/programmer. It's just not an operation in the community of mathematicians.
To confuse the matter: Mathematicians also explore a mapping which is used in a slightly different way from these computer scientists/programmers. If you are interested you can read the comment thread below and I invite you to inquire.
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
The operational form $ abmod n, $ is also widely used by mathematicians.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 26 '18 at 14:11
1
$begingroup$
As an operation? You mean a mapping from $Ftimes F to F$? I think of $a mod n$ as mapping into $mathbb{Z}_n$. Which in my lexicon is not an "operation." You mean that mathematicians use $amod n$ to mean something like computer scientist/programmers saying $a % n$? I haven't seen this but I believe you. Oh. Ok you softened your comment to say "operational form." I am with you now.
$endgroup$
– Mason
Dec 26 '18 at 14:14
2
$begingroup$
Yes - see "operational". The attempt by some to denigrate the operational form as non-mathematical is incorrect and misguided. Don't believe everything you read on the web.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 26 '18 at 14:18
2
$begingroup$
@BillDubuque Not $100 %$ I am understanding what is meant by "operational." I mean it's a mapping into $mathbb{Z_n}$. No problem from me exploring this mapping $phi: mathbb{Z} to mathbb{Z_n}$ but in this case ( precisely as the OP hints at) we can say $phi(x) = phi(y)$ and put down the notation $equiv$. Maybe a more complete answer would take on this element of the story. I think I would wait for OP to clarify or respond before I dive deeper into this conversation.
$endgroup$
– Mason
Dec 26 '18 at 14:24
1
$begingroup$
Haha. Don't believe everything you read on the web!
$endgroup$
– Mason
Dec 26 '18 at 14:29
|
show 8 more comments
$begingroup$
Mod is not an operation$^1$!
This is a cause of confusion for many students I have started adopting a new notation to clarify this $$17hspace {.1 cm}overset{displaystyle equiv}{tiny mod 5} hspace {.1 cm} 103 $$
The point is that $mod 5$ is something that modifies the equivalency and not one side or the other. It is no operation. The numbers $17$ and $103$ are in the same category if we are considering what their remainder is after we divide by $5$.
$1:$ Except when it is... The confusion here is that mod IS an operation whenever you talk to a computer scientist/programmer. It's just not an operation in the community of mathematicians.
To confuse the matter: Mathematicians also explore a mapping which is used in a slightly different way from these computer scientists/programmers. If you are interested you can read the comment thread below and I invite you to inquire.
$endgroup$
Mod is not an operation$^1$!
This is a cause of confusion for many students I have started adopting a new notation to clarify this $$17hspace {.1 cm}overset{displaystyle equiv}{tiny mod 5} hspace {.1 cm} 103 $$
The point is that $mod 5$ is something that modifies the equivalency and not one side or the other. It is no operation. The numbers $17$ and $103$ are in the same category if we are considering what their remainder is after we divide by $5$.
$1:$ Except when it is... The confusion here is that mod IS an operation whenever you talk to a computer scientist/programmer. It's just not an operation in the community of mathematicians.
To confuse the matter: Mathematicians also explore a mapping which is used in a slightly different way from these computer scientists/programmers. If you are interested you can read the comment thread below and I invite you to inquire.
edited Dec 26 '18 at 14:27
answered Dec 26 '18 at 14:02
MasonMason
1,9751530
1,9751530
2
$begingroup$
The operational form $ abmod n, $ is also widely used by mathematicians.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 26 '18 at 14:11
1
$begingroup$
As an operation? You mean a mapping from $Ftimes F to F$? I think of $a mod n$ as mapping into $mathbb{Z}_n$. Which in my lexicon is not an "operation." You mean that mathematicians use $amod n$ to mean something like computer scientist/programmers saying $a % n$? I haven't seen this but I believe you. Oh. Ok you softened your comment to say "operational form." I am with you now.
$endgroup$
– Mason
Dec 26 '18 at 14:14
2
$begingroup$
Yes - see "operational". The attempt by some to denigrate the operational form as non-mathematical is incorrect and misguided. Don't believe everything you read on the web.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 26 '18 at 14:18
2
$begingroup$
@BillDubuque Not $100 %$ I am understanding what is meant by "operational." I mean it's a mapping into $mathbb{Z_n}$. No problem from me exploring this mapping $phi: mathbb{Z} to mathbb{Z_n}$ but in this case ( precisely as the OP hints at) we can say $phi(x) = phi(y)$ and put down the notation $equiv$. Maybe a more complete answer would take on this element of the story. I think I would wait for OP to clarify or respond before I dive deeper into this conversation.
$endgroup$
– Mason
Dec 26 '18 at 14:24
1
$begingroup$
Haha. Don't believe everything you read on the web!
$endgroup$
– Mason
Dec 26 '18 at 14:29
|
show 8 more comments
2
$begingroup$
The operational form $ abmod n, $ is also widely used by mathematicians.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 26 '18 at 14:11
1
$begingroup$
As an operation? You mean a mapping from $Ftimes F to F$? I think of $a mod n$ as mapping into $mathbb{Z}_n$. Which in my lexicon is not an "operation." You mean that mathematicians use $amod n$ to mean something like computer scientist/programmers saying $a % n$? I haven't seen this but I believe you. Oh. Ok you softened your comment to say "operational form." I am with you now.
$endgroup$
– Mason
Dec 26 '18 at 14:14
2
$begingroup$
Yes - see "operational". The attempt by some to denigrate the operational form as non-mathematical is incorrect and misguided. Don't believe everything you read on the web.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 26 '18 at 14:18
2
$begingroup$
@BillDubuque Not $100 %$ I am understanding what is meant by "operational." I mean it's a mapping into $mathbb{Z_n}$. No problem from me exploring this mapping $phi: mathbb{Z} to mathbb{Z_n}$ but in this case ( precisely as the OP hints at) we can say $phi(x) = phi(y)$ and put down the notation $equiv$. Maybe a more complete answer would take on this element of the story. I think I would wait for OP to clarify or respond before I dive deeper into this conversation.
$endgroup$
– Mason
Dec 26 '18 at 14:24
1
$begingroup$
Haha. Don't believe everything you read on the web!
$endgroup$
– Mason
Dec 26 '18 at 14:29
2
2
$begingroup$
The operational form $ abmod n, $ is also widely used by mathematicians.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 26 '18 at 14:11
$begingroup$
The operational form $ abmod n, $ is also widely used by mathematicians.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 26 '18 at 14:11
1
1
$begingroup$
As an operation? You mean a mapping from $Ftimes F to F$? I think of $a mod n$ as mapping into $mathbb{Z}_n$. Which in my lexicon is not an "operation." You mean that mathematicians use $amod n$ to mean something like computer scientist/programmers saying $a % n$? I haven't seen this but I believe you. Oh. Ok you softened your comment to say "operational form." I am with you now.
$endgroup$
– Mason
Dec 26 '18 at 14:14
$begingroup$
As an operation? You mean a mapping from $Ftimes F to F$? I think of $a mod n$ as mapping into $mathbb{Z}_n$. Which in my lexicon is not an "operation." You mean that mathematicians use $amod n$ to mean something like computer scientist/programmers saying $a % n$? I haven't seen this but I believe you. Oh. Ok you softened your comment to say "operational form." I am with you now.
$endgroup$
– Mason
Dec 26 '18 at 14:14
2
2
$begingroup$
Yes - see "operational". The attempt by some to denigrate the operational form as non-mathematical is incorrect and misguided. Don't believe everything you read on the web.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 26 '18 at 14:18
$begingroup$
Yes - see "operational". The attempt by some to denigrate the operational form as non-mathematical is incorrect and misguided. Don't believe everything you read on the web.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 26 '18 at 14:18
2
2
$begingroup$
@BillDubuque Not $100 %$ I am understanding what is meant by "operational." I mean it's a mapping into $mathbb{Z_n}$. No problem from me exploring this mapping $phi: mathbb{Z} to mathbb{Z_n}$ but in this case ( precisely as the OP hints at) we can say $phi(x) = phi(y)$ and put down the notation $equiv$. Maybe a more complete answer would take on this element of the story. I think I would wait for OP to clarify or respond before I dive deeper into this conversation.
$endgroup$
– Mason
Dec 26 '18 at 14:24
$begingroup$
@BillDubuque Not $100 %$ I am understanding what is meant by "operational." I mean it's a mapping into $mathbb{Z_n}$. No problem from me exploring this mapping $phi: mathbb{Z} to mathbb{Z_n}$ but in this case ( precisely as the OP hints at) we can say $phi(x) = phi(y)$ and put down the notation $equiv$. Maybe a more complete answer would take on this element of the story. I think I would wait for OP to clarify or respond before I dive deeper into this conversation.
$endgroup$
– Mason
Dec 26 '18 at 14:24
1
1
$begingroup$
Haha. Don't believe everything you read on the web!
$endgroup$
– Mason
Dec 26 '18 at 14:29
$begingroup$
Haha. Don't believe everything you read on the web!
$endgroup$
– Mason
Dec 26 '18 at 14:29
|
show 8 more comments
$begingroup$
Parentheses serve to disambiguate the variant notations when used as in the first expression below
$$begin{align}
&a, =, bbmod n\[.2em]
{rm is it} &a = (bbmod n) {rm i.e.} a, =, {rm remainder of} bdiv n\[.2em]
{rm or is it} &a = b!!!pmod{! n} {rm i.e.} n {rm divides} a-b
end{align}$$
Insisting on the parentheses in the final expression removes the ambiguity. Some authors also believe the ambiguity is removed be using a congruence vs. equal sign, i.e. $,aequiv bmod n, $ but, alas, beginners often wrongly interpret this in operational form (2nd form above), esp. if it written with less whitespace $,aequiv bbmod n.,$ Some authors never use the operational form, which does eliminate the ambiguity (but may still prove confusing for beginners who use multiple textbooks).
Remark $ $ Despite some remarks to the contrary, it is worth emphasis that the operational form of $!bmod!$ is widely used in number theory and algebra, e.g. it plays a crucial role in the descent step in the Euclidean gcd algorithm
$$ |a|ge |b|,Rightarrow, gcd(a,b) = gcd(abmod b,, b)$$
Similarly many (inductive) proofs and (recursive) algorithms in number theory and algebra are governed by an analogous (Euclidean) descent (via division with remainder). As such, it proves convenient to have notation for this ubiquitous remainder descent operation.
Also the notation enables expression of fundamental laws that might otherwise be greatly obfuscated. A nice example of this is the $!bmod!$ Distributive Law
$$ abbmod ac, =, a(bbmod c)$$
This can be viewed as an operational reformulation of CRT = Chinese Remainder Theorem. Being operational it often greatly simplifies computations. Here's a simple example from here
$$ 3^{large 1+2n}!bmod 12, =, 3(3^{large 2n}!bmod 4), =, 3((-1)^{large 2n}!bmod 4), =, 3$$
Below is another example employing polynomial congruences $ $ (equivalent to Lagrange interpolation). If $,f,$ satisfies congruences $ overbrace{fequiv 0pmod{x!+!2}}^{large f(-2) = 0 }, $ and $, overbrace{fequivcolor{#0a0}8pmod{x!-!2}}^{large f(2) = color{#0a0}8phantom{|^{|}} } $ then
$qquadqquad fbmod x^2!-!4,$ $=, (x!+!2)Bigg[dfrac{f}{x!+!2}bmod x!-!color{#c00}2Bigg]$ $ =, underbrace{(x!+!2)left[dfrac{f(color{#c00}{2})}{color{#c00}2!+!2}right] =, 2(x!+!2)}_{large fbmod x-color{#c00}2, =, f(color{#c00}{2}),, =, color{#0a0}8}$
Generally whenever one performs nontrivial calculation it often proves convenient to have notations for normal forms (such as canonical representatives of equivalence classes in quotient objects).
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Parentheses serve to disambiguate the variant notations when used as in the first expression below
$$begin{align}
&a, =, bbmod n\[.2em]
{rm is it} &a = (bbmod n) {rm i.e.} a, =, {rm remainder of} bdiv n\[.2em]
{rm or is it} &a = b!!!pmod{! n} {rm i.e.} n {rm divides} a-b
end{align}$$
Insisting on the parentheses in the final expression removes the ambiguity. Some authors also believe the ambiguity is removed be using a congruence vs. equal sign, i.e. $,aequiv bmod n, $ but, alas, beginners often wrongly interpret this in operational form (2nd form above), esp. if it written with less whitespace $,aequiv bbmod n.,$ Some authors never use the operational form, which does eliminate the ambiguity (but may still prove confusing for beginners who use multiple textbooks).
Remark $ $ Despite some remarks to the contrary, it is worth emphasis that the operational form of $!bmod!$ is widely used in number theory and algebra, e.g. it plays a crucial role in the descent step in the Euclidean gcd algorithm
$$ |a|ge |b|,Rightarrow, gcd(a,b) = gcd(abmod b,, b)$$
Similarly many (inductive) proofs and (recursive) algorithms in number theory and algebra are governed by an analogous (Euclidean) descent (via division with remainder). As such, it proves convenient to have notation for this ubiquitous remainder descent operation.
Also the notation enables expression of fundamental laws that might otherwise be greatly obfuscated. A nice example of this is the $!bmod!$ Distributive Law
$$ abbmod ac, =, a(bbmod c)$$
This can be viewed as an operational reformulation of CRT = Chinese Remainder Theorem. Being operational it often greatly simplifies computations. Here's a simple example from here
$$ 3^{large 1+2n}!bmod 12, =, 3(3^{large 2n}!bmod 4), =, 3((-1)^{large 2n}!bmod 4), =, 3$$
Below is another example employing polynomial congruences $ $ (equivalent to Lagrange interpolation). If $,f,$ satisfies congruences $ overbrace{fequiv 0pmod{x!+!2}}^{large f(-2) = 0 }, $ and $, overbrace{fequivcolor{#0a0}8pmod{x!-!2}}^{large f(2) = color{#0a0}8phantom{|^{|}} } $ then
$qquadqquad fbmod x^2!-!4,$ $=, (x!+!2)Bigg[dfrac{f}{x!+!2}bmod x!-!color{#c00}2Bigg]$ $ =, underbrace{(x!+!2)left[dfrac{f(color{#c00}{2})}{color{#c00}2!+!2}right] =, 2(x!+!2)}_{large fbmod x-color{#c00}2, =, f(color{#c00}{2}),, =, color{#0a0}8}$
Generally whenever one performs nontrivial calculation it often proves convenient to have notations for normal forms (such as canonical representatives of equivalence classes in quotient objects).
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Parentheses serve to disambiguate the variant notations when used as in the first expression below
$$begin{align}
&a, =, bbmod n\[.2em]
{rm is it} &a = (bbmod n) {rm i.e.} a, =, {rm remainder of} bdiv n\[.2em]
{rm or is it} &a = b!!!pmod{! n} {rm i.e.} n {rm divides} a-b
end{align}$$
Insisting on the parentheses in the final expression removes the ambiguity. Some authors also believe the ambiguity is removed be using a congruence vs. equal sign, i.e. $,aequiv bmod n, $ but, alas, beginners often wrongly interpret this in operational form (2nd form above), esp. if it written with less whitespace $,aequiv bbmod n.,$ Some authors never use the operational form, which does eliminate the ambiguity (but may still prove confusing for beginners who use multiple textbooks).
Remark $ $ Despite some remarks to the contrary, it is worth emphasis that the operational form of $!bmod!$ is widely used in number theory and algebra, e.g. it plays a crucial role in the descent step in the Euclidean gcd algorithm
$$ |a|ge |b|,Rightarrow, gcd(a,b) = gcd(abmod b,, b)$$
Similarly many (inductive) proofs and (recursive) algorithms in number theory and algebra are governed by an analogous (Euclidean) descent (via division with remainder). As such, it proves convenient to have notation for this ubiquitous remainder descent operation.
Also the notation enables expression of fundamental laws that might otherwise be greatly obfuscated. A nice example of this is the $!bmod!$ Distributive Law
$$ abbmod ac, =, a(bbmod c)$$
This can be viewed as an operational reformulation of CRT = Chinese Remainder Theorem. Being operational it often greatly simplifies computations. Here's a simple example from here
$$ 3^{large 1+2n}!bmod 12, =, 3(3^{large 2n}!bmod 4), =, 3((-1)^{large 2n}!bmod 4), =, 3$$
Below is another example employing polynomial congruences $ $ (equivalent to Lagrange interpolation). If $,f,$ satisfies congruences $ overbrace{fequiv 0pmod{x!+!2}}^{large f(-2) = 0 }, $ and $, overbrace{fequivcolor{#0a0}8pmod{x!-!2}}^{large f(2) = color{#0a0}8phantom{|^{|}} } $ then
$qquadqquad fbmod x^2!-!4,$ $=, (x!+!2)Bigg[dfrac{f}{x!+!2}bmod x!-!color{#c00}2Bigg]$ $ =, underbrace{(x!+!2)left[dfrac{f(color{#c00}{2})}{color{#c00}2!+!2}right] =, 2(x!+!2)}_{large fbmod x-color{#c00}2, =, f(color{#c00}{2}),, =, color{#0a0}8}$
Generally whenever one performs nontrivial calculation it often proves convenient to have notations for normal forms (such as canonical representatives of equivalence classes in quotient objects).
$endgroup$
Parentheses serve to disambiguate the variant notations when used as in the first expression below
$$begin{align}
&a, =, bbmod n\[.2em]
{rm is it} &a = (bbmod n) {rm i.e.} a, =, {rm remainder of} bdiv n\[.2em]
{rm or is it} &a = b!!!pmod{! n} {rm i.e.} n {rm divides} a-b
end{align}$$
Insisting on the parentheses in the final expression removes the ambiguity. Some authors also believe the ambiguity is removed be using a congruence vs. equal sign, i.e. $,aequiv bmod n, $ but, alas, beginners often wrongly interpret this in operational form (2nd form above), esp. if it written with less whitespace $,aequiv bbmod n.,$ Some authors never use the operational form, which does eliminate the ambiguity (but may still prove confusing for beginners who use multiple textbooks).
Remark $ $ Despite some remarks to the contrary, it is worth emphasis that the operational form of $!bmod!$ is widely used in number theory and algebra, e.g. it plays a crucial role in the descent step in the Euclidean gcd algorithm
$$ |a|ge |b|,Rightarrow, gcd(a,b) = gcd(abmod b,, b)$$
Similarly many (inductive) proofs and (recursive) algorithms in number theory and algebra are governed by an analogous (Euclidean) descent (via division with remainder). As such, it proves convenient to have notation for this ubiquitous remainder descent operation.
Also the notation enables expression of fundamental laws that might otherwise be greatly obfuscated. A nice example of this is the $!bmod!$ Distributive Law
$$ abbmod ac, =, a(bbmod c)$$
This can be viewed as an operational reformulation of CRT = Chinese Remainder Theorem. Being operational it often greatly simplifies computations. Here's a simple example from here
$$ 3^{large 1+2n}!bmod 12, =, 3(3^{large 2n}!bmod 4), =, 3((-1)^{large 2n}!bmod 4), =, 3$$
Below is another example employing polynomial congruences $ $ (equivalent to Lagrange interpolation). If $,f,$ satisfies congruences $ overbrace{fequiv 0pmod{x!+!2}}^{large f(-2) = 0 }, $ and $, overbrace{fequivcolor{#0a0}8pmod{x!-!2}}^{large f(2) = color{#0a0}8phantom{|^{|}} } $ then
$qquadqquad fbmod x^2!-!4,$ $=, (x!+!2)Bigg[dfrac{f}{x!+!2}bmod x!-!color{#c00}2Bigg]$ $ =, underbrace{(x!+!2)left[dfrac{f(color{#c00}{2})}{color{#c00}2!+!2}right] =, 2(x!+!2)}_{large fbmod x-color{#c00}2, =, f(color{#c00}{2}),, =, color{#0a0}8}$
Generally whenever one performs nontrivial calculation it often proves convenient to have notations for normal forms (such as canonical representatives of equivalence classes in quotient objects).
edited Dec 28 '18 at 20:49
answered Dec 26 '18 at 16:04
Bill DubuqueBill Dubuque
211k29193646
211k29193646
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3052950%2fdo-the-parenthesis-around-modulo-matter%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
In my experience, mathematicians rarely use "mod" as an infix binary operation in mathematical writing. Generally the parentheses are not necessary but they aid clarity a little, especially in complicated modular relationships. If $=$ is used rather than $equiv$ then you should think about whether mod might be a binary operation.
$endgroup$
– Ian
Dec 26 '18 at 13:52
$begingroup$
@Ian Operational mod is common in some mathematical contexts, e,g. see my answer.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 26 '18 at 17:30