There is a video on youtube where a guy in the comments proves the following:
If $15l \equiv 2 \mod7$, then $l \equiv 2 \mod7$.
He does it like this:
15L = 2 (mod 7)
=> 15L = 7k + 2 for some k in the integers
Let k = 2T where T is an integer
=> 15L = 14T + 2
=> L = 14T - 14L + 2
=> L = 7(2T - 2L) + 2
Let H = (2T - 2L), then H is an integer.
=> L = 7H + 2
=> L = 2 (mod 7)
What bothers me is the following line "Let k = 2T where T is an integer". Why replace $k$ with a multiple of 2? We would get the same result if we do not even replace $k$ and leave it as it is for example:
L = 7k - 14L + 2
=> L = 7(k - 2L) + 2
=> L = 2 (mod 7)
Is my method correct as well or is there some deeper reasoning as to why would he replace $k$ with $2T$?
EDIT: Here is the video if anyone is interested, the comment is made by the user RB:
I'd say you are right and the video is wrong. For instance, we could have $k=19$, which can't be written as $k=2T$ for an integer $T$.
By the way, a possibly simpler approach to the whole thing is to note that $15\equiv 1 \pmod{7}$.
So $2\equiv 15l\equiv l \pmod{7}$.