Line 6: Line 6:
  
 
1/2 should be the multiplicative inverse of 2. In mod 7, the mult. inverse of 2 is 4 (4*2 = 2*4 = 8 mod 7 = 1). So 1/2 mod 7 could be interpreted as 4. Similar logic for the others.
 
1/2 should be the multiplicative inverse of 2. In mod 7, the mult. inverse of 2 is 4 (4*2 = 2*4 = 8 mod 7 = 1). So 1/2 mod 7 could be interpreted as 4. Similar logic for the others.
 +
 +
----
 +
 +
I understand what you're saying for 1/2.  It makes sense. But how does that follow for numbers like sqrt(-3)?

Revision as of 14:42, 22 October 2008

I used the examples on page 249 to "give a reasonable interpretation". Is that what they want?


I think what they want is something like this...

1/2 should be the multiplicative inverse of 2. In mod 7, the mult. inverse of 2 is 4 (4*2 = 2*4 = 8 mod 7 = 1). So 1/2 mod 7 could be interpreted as 4. Similar logic for the others.


I understand what you're saying for 1/2. It makes sense. But how does that follow for numbers like sqrt(-3)?

Alumni Liaison

ECE462 Survivor

Seraj Dosenbach