I don't find the error. Where is it?

[shahar]

The question:
Can be an algebraic way to do modulo?
My answer:
Yes,
to, find the upper small multiplication of x
to subtract it from the numerator and that is the remainder.
In a formula:
Let the numerator will be l
We say l = am
l = nx + c
(m is whole number)

am = nx + c
so:
c = am - nx
and
m = n+ 1
am is the divider, the relationship between m and n is the consecutive numbers.
Where is the error?

 

[Dr.Peterson]

The question:
Can be an algebraic way to do modulo?
My answer:
Yes,
to, find the upper small multiplication of x
to subtract it from the numerator and that is the remainder.
In a formula:
Let the numerator will be l
We say l = am
l = nx + c
(m is whole number)

am = nx + c
so:
c = am - nx
and
m = n+ 1
am is the divider, the relationship between m and n is the consecutive numbers.
Where is the error?

This is almost incomprehensible.

Please state the actual problem you are trying to solve, and then explain everything in different words, so we can triangulate on your actual meaning. (That is, when you don't know a language well, you need to say the same thing in multiple ways in the hope that some things you say will clarify others.)

In particular, "the upper small multiplication of x" means nothing. You may mean something like "the greatest multiple of a that is less than x", but I am not convinced of that. And then you mention numerator and denominator without having mentioned any fraction at all; you may mean "dividend" and "divisor", but you haven't yet mentioned a division, either.

 

[shahar]

This is almost incomprehensible.

Please state the actual problem you are trying to solve, and then explain everything in different words, so we can triangulate on your actual meaning. (That is, when you don't know a language well, you need to say the same thing in multiple ways in the hope that some things you say will clarify others.)

In particular, "the upper small multiplication of x" means nothing. You may mean something like "the greatest multiple of a that is less than x", but I am not convinced of that. And then you mention numerator and denominator without having mentioned any fraction at all; you may mean "dividend" and "divisor", but you haven't yet mentioned a division, either.

O.K. I will write it in the words that you gave two me:
We say that l the divisor is so the error is if I say that m not equals to n + 1 it change the equation
if we divide the divisor l by x
so mx = l
and mx = nx + c
and c the remainder
the m is not n+1 but m is equal to n (and the remainder (c) is 0) or m is equals n plus number between 0 to 1?

My answer should be:
m = n
or
m = n + q
and 0< q < 1. Right?

in the equation
l = nx + c = (q+n)x

(q+n = m => nx + c = (q+n)x

 

[Dr.Peterson]

This is even worse.

Once again: STATE THE PROBLEM YOU ARE SOLVING, first. What you write must refer back to things that have been defined; you can't talk about "the divisor" if no division has been mentioned yet. And my words were only guesses at what you might possibly be talking about, with no evidence. Then you talk about dividing the divisor! Nonsense.

And if you are not solving a specific problem, make one up as an example, so that we can tell what you are talking about. Specific examples are much easier to talk about. After an example, you can ask your general questions. But asking abstract questions in a language you don't know well is an impossible task.

 

[shahar]

The problem is:
Show the operation modulus by other algebraic operation with algebraic symbols like x, y and z. Can I do it? How I do it?

 

[Dr.Peterson]

Show me a specific example of what you want to do. "Show the operation modulus" tells me nothing. In fact, the word "modulus" is used in several quite different ways; mathematically, it is not an operation at all.

What problem caused you to want to ask this question? I want something with actual numbers in it, so I can be sure what you are asking about. Show me how you would do it without algebraic symbols. Show me something.

 

[shahar]

Let 10 be divisor
and 3 the dividend
I say that the multiple 3 that makes the 3 the smallest multiple of 10 is 3 and the remainder is 1.
Now, can I do it by notation?

 

[HallsofIvy]

I say that the multiple 3 that makes the 3 the smallest multiple of 10 is 3 and the remainder is 1.

That is almost incomprehensible- 3 is certainly NOT a "multiple of 10". I think you mean that "the largest multiple of 3 that is less than 10 is 3(3)= 9 and the remainder is 1.
You can write that as \(\displaystyle \frac{10}{3}= 3+\frac{1}{3}\).

 

[Dr.Peterson]

Let 10 be divisor
and 3 the dividend
I say that the multiple 3 that makes the 3 the smallest multiple of 10 is 3 and the remainder is 1.
Now, can I do it by notation?

If Halls is right, then you completely reversed the word: 10 is the dividend and 3 is the divisor.

When you don't know the right words, the best way to communicate is with complete, detailed, specific examples. Please do so.