Proof For Distinct Modular Exponentiation Of 3^a Mod 2^a

$$

Introduction

In the fascinating realm of number theory, a captivating question arises concerning the behavior of modular exponentiation. Specifically, we delve into the assertion that for all integers ${a}$ and ${b}$ such that ${a > b > 2}$, the modular results of ${3^a \pmod {2^a}}$ and ${3^b \pmod {2^b}}$ are distinct. This intriguing problem invites a rigorous mathematical exploration, challenging us to demonstrate the uniqueness of these modular residues. To fully understand the problem, let's define ${r_n = 3^n \pmod {2^n}}$, where ${0 < r_n < 2^n}$. The core of the question is whether it is possible to find two integers ${a}$ and ${b}$, with ${a > b > 2}$, such that ${r_a = r_b}$. This exploration will not only deepen our understanding of modular arithmetic but also highlight the subtle interplay between exponentiation and congruence. Our journey through this proof will involve leveraging fundamental concepts in number theory, and it promises to be an enlightening exercise in mathematical reasoning. Understanding modular arithmetic is crucial in various fields, including cryptography and computer science, making this exploration highly relevant and valuable.

Initial Assumptions and Setup

To embark on this mathematical journey, we begin by assuming, without loss of generality (WLOG), that there exist integers ${a}$ and ${b}$ such that ${a > b > 2}$ and ${3^a \pmod {2^a} = 3^b \pmod {2^b}}$. This assumption sets the stage for a proof by contradiction, where we aim to demonstrate that this initial assumption leads to a logical inconsistency. Let's denote the common residue as ${r}$, such that ${r = 3^a \pmod {2^a} = 3^b \pmod {2^b}}$. This implies that both ${3^a}$ and ${3^b}$ leave the same remainder ${r}$ when divided by ${2^a}$ and ${2^b}$, respectively. Expressing this mathematically, we have:

${ 3^a \equiv r \pmod {2^a} \\ 3^b \equiv r \pmod {2^b} }$

From these congruences, we can infer that:

${ 3^a \equiv r \pmod {2^b} }$

since ${2^a}$ is a multiple of ${2^b}$. This is a crucial step as it allows us to work with a common modulus, ${2^b}$. Now, let's consider the difference between ${3^a}$ and ${3^b}$. If their remainders are the same when divided by ${2^b}$, then their difference must be divisible by ${2^b}$. This leads us to the expression:

${ 3^a - 3^b \equiv 0 \pmod {2^b} }$

This congruence is a cornerstone of our proof. It suggests that ${2^b}$ divides ${3^a - 3^b}$ exactly. Factoring out ${3^b}$, we get:

${ 3^b(3^{a-b} - 1) \equiv 0 \pmod {2^b} }$

This equation is pivotal as it breaks down the problem into more manageable components. The next step involves carefully analyzing the factors ${3^b}$ and ${3^{a-b} - 1}$ in relation to the modulus ${2^b}$. Since ${3^b}$ is a power of 3, it is coprime with any power of 2. This observation is crucial because it allows us to focus on the second factor, ${3^{a-b} - 1}$, and its divisibility by ${2^b}$. This careful setup paves the way for further exploration and ultimately, the resolution of the problem. The foundational assumptions we've laid out here are critical for the logical progression of the proof, ensuring that each step builds upon the previous one in a coherent and mathematically sound manner.

Analyzing the Divisibility

Having established that ${3^b(3^{a-b} - 1) \equiv 0 \pmod {2^b}}$ and recognizing that ${3^b}$ and ${2^b}$ are coprime, we can deduce that ${3^{a-b} - 1}$ must be divisible by ${2^b}$. In mathematical terms, this means:

${ 3^{a-b} - 1 \equiv 0 \pmod {2^b} }$

Or equivalently,

${ 3^{a-b} \equiv 1 \pmod {2^b} }$

This congruence is central to our analysis. It tells us that some power of 3, specifically ${3^{a-b}}$, leaves a remainder of 1 when divided by ${2^b}$. This is a significant piece of information, and we must now delve deeper into its implications. To do so, we introduce the concept of the order of an integer modulo another integer. The order of 3 modulo ${2^b}$, denoted as ${\text{ord}_{2^b}(3)}$, is the smallest positive integer ${k}$ such that ${3^k \equiv 1 \pmod {2^b}}$. Since ${3^{a-b} \equiv 1 \pmod {2^b}}$, we know that the order of 3 modulo ${2^b}$ must divide ${a-b}$. That is:

${ \text{ord}_{2^b}(3) | (a-b) }$

Now, a crucial result from number theory comes into play. It states that for ${b > 2}$, the order of 3 modulo ${2^b}$ is ${2^{b-2}}$. This is a well-established theorem that can be proven using lifting the exponent lemma or other techniques. Accepting this result for now, we have:

${ \text{ord}_{2^b}(3) = 2^{b-2} }$

Therefore, ${2^{b-2}}$ must divide ${a-b}$. This can be written as:

${ a - b = k imes 2^{b-2} }$

for some positive integer ${k}$. This equation provides a crucial link between ${a}$, ${b}$, and the order of 3 modulo ${2^b}$. The fact that ${a - b}$ is a multiple of ${2^{b-2}}$ places a significant constraint on the possible values of ${a}$ and ${b}$. We now need to explore how this constraint interacts with our initial assumption that ${3^a \pmod {2^a} = 3^b \pmod {2^b}}$. The divisibility condition we've uncovered is a key stepping stone towards either proving or disproving our initial assumption. Our next task will be to leverage this condition to see if it leads to any contradictions or inconsistencies.

Applying Lifting The Exponent Lemma

To further dissect the implications of our findings, we invoke the Lifting The Exponent Lemma (LTE), a powerful tool in number theory. This lemma is particularly useful when dealing with congruences involving powers. In our case, we are interested in the exponent of 2 that divides ${3^n - 1}$. The LTE lemma provides a way to determine this exponent under certain conditions. The Lifting The Exponent Lemma states that if ${x}$ and ${y}$ are odd integers, and ${n}$ is an even integer, then for ${v_2(x-y) \ge 1}$:

${ v_2(x^n - y^n) = v_2(x - y) + v_2(x + y) + v_2(n) - 1 }$

where ${v_2(m)}$ denotes the exponent of the highest power of 2 that divides ${m}$. In simpler terms, it tells us how many factors of 2 are present in a number. Now, let's apply this lemma to our situation. We have already established that ${3^{a-b} \equiv 1 \pmod {2^b}}$, which implies that ${2^b}$ divides ${3^{a-b} - 1}$. We want to find the exact power of 2 that divides ${3^{a-b} - 1}$, so we need to compute ${v_2(3^{a-b} - 1)}$. Applying the LTE lemma with ${x = 3}$, ${y = 1}$, and ${n = a - b}$, we get:

${ v_2(3^{a-b} - 1) = v_2(3 - 1) + v_2(3 + 1) + v_2(a - b) - 1 }$

Simplifying the terms, we have:

${ v_2(3^{a-b} - 1) = v_2(2) + v_2(4) + v_2(a - b) - 1 }$

Since ${v_2(2) = 1}$ and ${v_2(4) = 2}$, the equation becomes:

${ v_2(3^{a-b} - 1) = 1 + 2 + v_2(a - b) - 1 = 2 + v_2(a - b) }$

We also know that ${a - b = k imes 2^{b-2}}$, so we can substitute this into the equation:

${ v_2(3^{a-b} - 1) = 2 + v_2(k imes 2^{b-2}) = 2 + v_2(k) + v_2(2^{b-2}) }$

This simplifies to:

${ v_2(3^{a-b} - 1) = 2 + v_2(k) + (b - 2) = b + v_2(k) }$

This result is incredibly important. It tells us that the highest power of 2 that divides ${3^{a-b} - 1}$ is ${2^{b + v_2(k)}}$. However, we initially knew that ${2^b}$ divides ${3^{a-b} - 1}$. Now we have a more precise understanding of the power of 2 that divides this expression. If ${v_2(k) > 0}$, then the power of 2 dividing ${3^{a-b} - 1}$ is strictly greater than ${2^b}$. This LTE analysis provides us with a sharper tool to understand the divisibility properties, which is vital for our proof. The next step is to explore the implications of this refined divisibility condition and see if it leads to a contradiction or further insights.

Deriving a Contradiction

Having applied the Lifting The Exponent Lemma, we've established that the highest power of 2 dividing ${3^{a-b} - 1}$ is ${2^{b + v_2(k)}}$, where ${a - b = k imes 2^{b-2}}$. This means:

${ 3^{a-b} - 1 = m imes 2^{b + v_2(k)} }$

for some odd integer ${m}$. Recall that we initially had the congruence:

${ 3^a \equiv 3^b \pmod {2^b} }$

which led us to:

${ 3^b(3^{a-b} - 1) \equiv 0 \pmod {2^b} }$

Now we know that ${3^{a-b} - 1 = m imes 2^{b + v_2(k)}}$, so we can rewrite the above congruence as:

${ 3^b(m imes 2^{b + v_2(k)}) \equiv 0 \pmod {2^b} }$

This congruence holds true because ${2^b}$ indeed divides ${3^b(m imes 2^{b + v_2(k)})}$. However, our analysis using LTE gives us more information than just the divisibility by ${2^b}$. It tells us the exact power of 2 that divides ${3^{a-b} - 1}$. Now, let's consider the case when ${k = 1}$. If ${k = 1}$, then ${a - b = 2^{b-2}}$ and ${v_2(k) = 0}$. In this scenario, the highest power of 2 dividing ${3^{a-b} - 1}$ is ${2^b}$. However, if ${k > 1}$, then ${v_2(k) > 0}$, and the highest power of 2 dividing ${3^{a-b} - 1}$ is ${2^{b + v_2(k)}}$, which is strictly greater than ${2^b}$. Now, let's look at the original assumption again:

${ 3^a \equiv 3^b \pmod {2^a} }$

This implies that there exists an integer ${n}$ such that:

${ 3^a - 3^b = n imes 2^a }$

Factoring out ${3^b}$, we get:

${ 3^b(3^{a-b} - 1) = n imes 2^a }$

Substituting ${3^{a-b} - 1 = m imes 2^{b + v_2(k)}}$, we have:

${ 3^b(m imes 2^{b + v_2(k)}) = n imes 2^a }$

Since ${m}$ is odd, we can divide both sides by ${2^{b + v_2(k)}}$ to get:

${ 3^b imes m = n imes 2^{a - b - v_2(k)} }$

Since the left side is odd (as ${3^b}$ and ${m}$ are odd), the right side must also be odd. This is only possible if the exponent of 2 on the right side is 0, i.e.,

${ a - b - v_2(k) = 0 }$

So,

${ a = b + v_2(k) }$

But we also know that ${a - b = k imes 2^{b-2}}$, thus:

${ k imes 2^{b-2} = v_2(k) }$

This equation presents a critical contradiction. The left side grows exponentially with ${b}$, while the right side, ${v_2(k)}$, can grow at most logarithmically with ${k}$. For ${b > 2}$, this equation cannot hold for any integer ${k}$. This contradiction arises from our initial assumption that ${3^a \pmod {2^a} = 3^b \pmod {2^b}}$ for some ${a > b > 2}$. Therefore, our initial assumption must be false.

Conclusion

In conclusion, through a rigorous mathematical exploration, we have successfully demonstrated that the assumption ${\exists a, b}$ where ${a > b > 2}$ such that ${3^a \pmod {2^a} = 3^b \pmod {2^b}}$ leads to a contradiction. By leveraging key concepts from number theory, including modular arithmetic, the order of an integer modulo another integer, and the Lifting The Exponent Lemma, we meticulously dissected the implications of our initial assumption. The crucial step was recognizing the divisibility condition and applying LTE to refine our understanding of the powers of 2 involved. The final contradiction, derived from the equation ${k imes 2^{b-2} = v_2(k)}$, definitively proves that our initial assumption is untenable. Therefore, we can confidently assert that for all integers ${a}$ and ${b}$ such that ${a > b > 2}$, the modular results of ${3^a \pmod {2^a}}$ and ${3^b \pmod {2^b}}$ are distinct. This completes the proof of the statement:

${ \forall a > b > 2 : 3^a \pmod {2^a} \not= 3^b \pmod {2^b} }$

This exploration not only provides a concrete answer to a specific number theory question but also underscores the power and elegance of mathematical reasoning. The techniques and concepts employed in this proof, such as modular arithmetic and LTE, are fundamental tools in number theory and have wide-ranging applications in various fields, including cryptography and computer science. This journey through modular exponentiation and congruence serves as a testament to the beauty and depth of mathematical inquiry.