3-6-2019

Euler’s Theorem
Euler’s theorem generalizes Fermat’s theorem to the case where the modulus is composite.

The key point of the proof of Fermat’s theorem was that if p is prime, {1, 2, . . . , p − 1} are relatively
prime to p.
This suggests that in the general case, it might be useful to look at the numbers less than the modulus
n which are relatively prime to n. This motivates the following definition.

Definition. The Euler φ-function is the function on positive integers defined by

φ(n) = (the number of integers in {1, 2, . . . , n − 1} which are relatively prime to n).

For example, φ(24) = 8, because there are eight positive integers less than 24 which are relatively prime
to 24:
1, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23
On the other hand, φ(11) = 10, because all of the numbers in {1, . . . , 10} are relatively prime to 11.
Here is a graph of (n, φ(n)) for 1 ≤ n ≤ 5000:

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000

You can see that the function jumps around a little, but the data points are bounded above by the line
y = x. A point will be nearly on this line whenever n is prime, and since there are infinitely many primes,
there will always be points near it.
Later, I’ll derive a formula for computing φ(n) in terms of the prime factorization of n.

Proposition.

(a) If p is prime, φ(p) = p − 1.

(b) If p is prime and n ≥ 1, then φ(pn ) = pn − pn−1 .

Proof. (a) If p is prime, then all of the numbers {1, . . . , p − 1} are relatively prime to p. Hence, φ(p) = p − 1.

(b) There are pn elements in {1, 2, . . . , pn }. An element of this set is not relatively prime to p if and only if
it’s divisible by p. The elements of this set which are divisible by p are

1 · p, 2 · p, 3 · p, . . . , pn−1 · p.

1
 (Note that pn−1 ·p = pn is the last element of the set.) Thus, there are pn−1 elements of the set which are
divisible by p, i.e. pn−1 elements of the set which are not relatively prime to p. Hence, there are pn − pn−1
elements of the set which are relatively prime to p.
(The definition of φ(pn ) applies to the set {1, 2, . . . , pn − 1}, whereas I just counted the numbers from 1
to p . But this isn’t a problem, because I counted pn in the set, but then subtracted it off since it was not
n

relatively prime to p.)

(c) (a, n) = 1 if and only if ax = 1 (mod n) for some x, so a is relatively prime to n if and only if a is
invertible mod n. Now φ(n) is the number of elements in {1, 2, . . . , n − 1} which are relatively prime to n,
so φ(n) is also the number of elements in {1, 2, . . . , n − 1} which are invertible mod n.

Definition. A reduced residue system mod n is a set of numbers

a1 , a2 , . . . , aφ(n)

such that:

(a) If i 6= j, then ai 6= aj (mod n). That is, the a’s are distinct mod n.

(b) For each i, (ai , n) = 1. That is, all the a’s are relatively prime to n.

Thus, a reduced residue system contains exactly one representative for each number relatively prime
to n. Compare this to a complete residue system mod n, which contains exactly one representative to
every number mod n.

As an example, {1, 5, 7, 11} is a reduced residue system mod 12. So is {−11, 17, 31, −1}.
On the other hand, {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11} is a complete residue system mod 12.

Lemma. Let φ(n) = k, and let {a1 , . . . , ak } be a reduced residue system mod n.

(a) For all m, {a1 + mn, . . . , ak + mn} is a reduced residue system mod n.

(b) If (m, n) = 1, {ma1 , . . . , mak } is a reduced residue system mod n.

Proof. (a) This is clear, since ai = ai + mn (mod n) for all i.

(b) Since (m, n) = 1, I may find x such that mx = 1 (mod n). Since (ai , n) = 1, so I may find bi such that
ai bi = 1 (mod n). Then (xbi )(ami ) = (mx)(ai bi ) = 1 (mod n), which proves that ami is invertible mod n.
Hence, (ami , n) = 1 — the ma’s are relatively prime to n.
Now if mai = maj (mod n), then xmai = xmaj (mod n), or ai = aj (mod n). Since the a’s were
distinct mod n, this is only possible of i = j. Hence, the ma’s are also distinct mod n.
Therefore, {ma1 , . . . , mak } is a reduced residue system mod n.

Corollary. Let φ(n) = k, and let {a1 , . . . , ak } be a reduced residue system mod n. Suppose (s, n) = 1, and
let t be any integer. Then the following is a reduced residue system mod n:

{sa1 + tn, sa2 + tn, . . . , sak + tn}

Here are some examples of these results. {1, 5} is a reduced residue system mod 6. Adding 12 = 2 · 6 to
each number, I get {13, 17}, another reduced residue system mod 6.
Since (6, 25) = 1, I may multiply the original system by 25 to obtain {25, 125}, another reduced residue
system.
Finally, {25 + 12, 125 + 12} = {37, 137} is yet another reduced residue system mod 12.

Theorem. (Euler) Let n > 0, (a, n) = 1. Then

aφ(n) = 1 (mod n) .

2
Remark. If n is prime, then φ(n) = n − 1, and Euler’s theorem says an−1 = 1 (mod n), which is Fermat’s
theorem.

Proof. Let φ(n) = k, and let {a1 , . . . , ak } be a reduced residue system mod n. I may assume that the ai ’s
lie in the range {1, . . . , n − 1}.
Since (a, n) = 1, {aa1 , . . . , aak } is another reduced residue system mod n. Since this is the same set of
numbers mod n as the original system, the two systems must have the same product mod n:

(aa1 ) · · · (aak ) = a1 · · · ak (mod n) , ak (a1 · · · ak ) = a1 · · · ak (mod n) .

1 · · · ak , I get
Now each ai is invertible mod n, so multiplying both sides by a−1 −1

ak = 1 (mod n) , or aφ(n) = 1 (mod n) .

As an example, φ(40) = 16, and (9, 40) = 1. Hence, Euler’s theorem says that 916 = 1 (mod 40).
Similarly, 2116 = 1 (mod 40).
Example. Reduce 37103 (mod 40) to a number in the range {0, 1, . . . 39}.

Euler’s theorem says that 3716 = 1 (mod 40). So

37103 = 3796 · 377 = (3716 )6 · 94931877133 = 1 · 13 = 13 (mod 40) .

Example. Solve 15x = 7 (mod 32).

Note that (15, 32) = 1 and φ(32) = 16. Therefore, 1516 = 1 (mod 32). Multiply the equation by 1515 :

x = 7 · 1515 (mod 32) .

Now
7 · 1515 = 105 · 1514 = 105 · (152 )7 = 105 · 2257 = 9 · 17 = 9 (mod 32) .
So the solution is x = 9 (mod 32).

c 2019 by Bruce Ikenaga 3