Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Source. Lemma 1 on p. 78, with its proof on pp. 78–79 (physical pp. 2–3 of the scan). The paper's definition of a cover (p. 77) requires distinct moduli greater than one, which is why the statement below says distinct. The proof below is written here, including the distinct-modulus and primitivity checks the paper leaves implicit.
T. Cochrane and G. Myerson, Covering congruences in higher dimensions, Rocky Mountain J. Math. 26 (1996), no. 1, 77–81, doi:10.1216/rmjm/1181072104; the edition read and its page mapping are named on the source card.
Statement
Let
be a finite covering system of the integers whose moduli are distinct and composite. Put , and let be the distinct prime divisors of . Then the triples
form a homogeneous cover of : every satisfies one of
All moduli in (1) are distinct and greater than one, and every coefficient triple is primitive in the sense that its three entries have greatest common divisor one.
Proof
Fix . If , choose a prime dividing that greatest common divisor. Then , so the corresponding vertical congruence in (2) holds.
Suppose instead that . Choose with
The one-dimensional family covers the integer , so for some ,
Multiplication by is valid modulo , and . Therefore , which is the corresponding lifted congruence in (2). The two cases cover every ordered pair.
The are distinct primes, while the are distinct composite integers, so no modulus in the first part of (1) equals one in the second. Finally,
Thus (1) satisfies every part of the homogeneous-cover definition.
Bears on. The construction of a finite homogeneous cover in the main theorem.