division problem verification

[Martoman]

http://img146.imageshack.us/i/divisionv.png/


That picture is taken from a book. Am i going completely nuts, or when they assign values to r like r = 0,1,2 THEY COMPLETELY ignore the r term next to the 8? Or am I missing something.

[TrueTears]

http://img146.imageshack.us/i/divisionv.png/


That picture is taken from a book. Am i going completely nuts, or when they assign values to r like r = 0,1,2 THEY COMPLETELY ignore the r term next to the 8? Or am I missing something.

heh i see you're reading gareth, nice

anyways it's because the coefficient of q is 4, thus r must always be smaller than 4, so we have the values 0 , 1, 2, 3

[Martoman]

No no, i get that, but its the fact that say r = 0, doesn't that mean n =

So n =

[kamil9876]

yes, if , then the number is equal to for some integer .

It makes sense, means that a is a multiple of , hence for some integer , and therefore


Modular arithmetic deals with this kind of stuff really easily.

[Martoman]

yes, if , then the number is equal to for some integer .

It makes sense, means that a is a multiple of , hence for some integer , and therefore


Modular arithmetic deals with this kind of stuff really easily.

SO WHY DOES THE BOOK KEEP THE R THERE???
I am officially losing it.

[kamil9876]

Well yes, they could just as well have subbed it in and it you woudl still get the same information: its a multiple of 4.

Anything of the form 4(some integer) + 0 is a multiple of 4.

I guess they just didn't clean up the "some integer" part, but that's ok because you only need to know that it is an integer, and it is indeed.

[Martoman]

... thank you for clearing up my insanity.

[TrueTears]

btw a tip, don't read too much into detail into the workings in gareth, try it urself, they're not always clear on the working

[Blakhitman]

And you're 14 years old?

I didn't even know what a pro numeral was then...

[Martoman]

mmmm i bet you didn't do methods when you were 13 either.