$mathbb Z[sqrt{-7}]$ is not a UFD
$begingroup$
I can prove this for $sqrt{-5}$. What changes for the above question? Is it a similar proof? What would be the irreducible elements? Are they $1$ and $7$ ?
abstract-algebra ring-theory
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I can prove this for $sqrt{-5}$. What changes for the above question? Is it a similar proof? What would be the irreducible elements? Are they $1$ and $7$ ?
abstract-algebra ring-theory
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Please include your thoughts and efforts on the problem.
$endgroup$
– Servaes
Dec 6 '18 at 14:38
$begingroup$
Hint: $3^2+7=4^2$.
$endgroup$
– egreg
Dec 6 '18 at 14:55
1
$begingroup$
Hint: $(1+sqrt{-7})(1-sqrt{-7})$.
$endgroup$
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Dec 6 '18 at 15:32
1
$begingroup$
See also this closedly related question.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 20:24
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I can prove this for $sqrt{-5}$. What changes for the above question? Is it a similar proof? What would be the irreducible elements? Are they $1$ and $7$ ?
abstract-algebra ring-theory
$endgroup$
I can prove this for $sqrt{-5}$. What changes for the above question? Is it a similar proof? What would be the irreducible elements? Are they $1$ and $7$ ?
abstract-algebra ring-theory
abstract-algebra ring-theory
edited Dec 7 '18 at 1:07
Andrews
1,2641320
1,2641320
asked Dec 6 '18 at 14:33
JacobKnightJacobKnight
194
194
$begingroup$
Please include your thoughts and efforts on the problem.
$endgroup$
– Servaes
Dec 6 '18 at 14:38
$begingroup$
Hint: $3^2+7=4^2$.
$endgroup$
– egreg
Dec 6 '18 at 14:55
1
$begingroup$
Hint: $(1+sqrt{-7})(1-sqrt{-7})$.
$endgroup$
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Dec 6 '18 at 15:32
1
$begingroup$
See also this closedly related question.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 20:24
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Please include your thoughts and efforts on the problem.
$endgroup$
– Servaes
Dec 6 '18 at 14:38
$begingroup$
Hint: $3^2+7=4^2$.
$endgroup$
– egreg
Dec 6 '18 at 14:55
1
$begingroup$
Hint: $(1+sqrt{-7})(1-sqrt{-7})$.
$endgroup$
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Dec 6 '18 at 15:32
1
$begingroup$
See also this closedly related question.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 20:24
$begingroup$
Please include your thoughts and efforts on the problem.
$endgroup$
– Servaes
Dec 6 '18 at 14:38
$begingroup$
Please include your thoughts and efforts on the problem.
$endgroup$
– Servaes
Dec 6 '18 at 14:38
$begingroup$
Hint: $3^2+7=4^2$.
$endgroup$
– egreg
Dec 6 '18 at 14:55
$begingroup$
Hint: $3^2+7=4^2$.
$endgroup$
– egreg
Dec 6 '18 at 14:55
1
1
$begingroup$
Hint: $(1+sqrt{-7})(1-sqrt{-7})$.
$endgroup$
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Dec 6 '18 at 15:32
$begingroup$
Hint: $(1+sqrt{-7})(1-sqrt{-7})$.
$endgroup$
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Dec 6 '18 at 15:32
1
1
$begingroup$
See also this closedly related question.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 20:24
$begingroup$
See also this closedly related question.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 20:24
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Hint $ $ It's simpler: UFDs are integrally closed, but it is not since $,(1+sqrt{-7})/2 $ is a root of $,x^2-x+2.,$ Said more simply it fails RRT = Rational Root Test, which holds true in any UFD.
Remark $ $ The RRT proof fails because some gcd it employs fails to exist in $,Bbb Z[sqrt{-7}].,$ Since gcds always exist in a UFD, we can use such gcd failure to prove rings are not UFDs. Let's use this to prove a more general case (for variety vs. traditional proofs).
Lemma $ Bbb Z[sqrt d]$ is not a UFD if $,color{#0a0}{dequiv 1pmod{!4}} $
Proof $ $ Assume it's a UFD. $ color{#0a0}{ww'}=(1!+!sqrt d)(1!-!sqrt d) = 1-d = color{#0a0}{4k},, color{#c00}{w} = 2-w',$
therefore the gcd product $ ,(2,color{#0a0}w)(2,color{#0a0}w') = (4,2w',2w,color{#0a0}{4k}) = 2(2,w',color{#c00}{w}) = 2(2,w')$
Cancelling $,(2,w'),Rightarrow, (2,w) = (2),Rightarrow, 2mid w,Rightarrow, w/2 = (1!+!sqrt d)/2in Bbb Z[sqrt d] Rightarrow!Leftarrow$
Further $ $ if $,w=sqrt{c^2d},$ then $,Bbb Z[w],$ UFD $,Rightarrow, cmid 1,,$ else $,(w/c)^2 = d,$ contra RRT (as above).
Alternatively by gcds $,(c,w)^2 = (c^2,cw,c^2d) = c(c,w),Rightarrow, (c,w) = (c),Rightarrow, cmid w,Rightarrow,cmid 1$
Combining yields a purely gcd-based proof of the following well-known fact.
Theorem $, Bbb Z[sqrt d], $ a UFD $,Rightarrow, d,$ squarefree and $,dnotequiv 1pmod{!4}$
Note $ $ The proof of the theorem also works if we instead assume the ring is a PID and read the tuples as ideals vs. gcds [since the proof uses only laws common to both: $ $ distributive, associative, commutative, and $(a,b,bc) = (a,b),$]. Then it yields $,(2,w),$ is noninvertible (so nonprincipal).
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
And more generally this idea goes through in $mathbf Z[sqrt{d}]$ for nonsquare $d equiv 1 bmod 4$, not just d = -7$.
$endgroup$
– KCd
Dec 6 '18 at 15:40
$begingroup$
@Downvoter If something is not clear then please feel welcome to ask questions and I will be happy to elaborate.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 17:25
$begingroup$
+1, I think $Z[sqrt d]$ is integrally closed if and only if $d$ congurent to $1$ module $4$.
$endgroup$
– UserS
Dec 6 '18 at 17:39
$begingroup$
@UserS: it is integrally closed if and only if $d$ is squarefree and $d$ is not congruent to $1 bmod 4$.
$endgroup$
– KCd
Dec 6 '18 at 17:56
$begingroup$
@UserS KCd is correct. I added a proof (using only gcds for variety vs. traditional proofs).
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 19:33
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
$$(1+sqrt{-7})×(1-sqrt{-7})=8=2×2×2.$$We show $2,1+sqrt{-7},1-sqrt{-7}$ are irreducibles.
So let $2=(a+sqrt{-7}b)(c+sqrt{-7}d)$ where $a,b,c,d in Bbb Z$, then taking norms $4=(a^2+7b^2)(c^2+7d^2)implies b=d=0$ , since for $e,fin Bbb Z$ and $fnot =0implies e^2+7f^2geq 7$. Also either $a$ or $c$ is $+1,-1$ as $2^2=4=(ac)^2$ and $Bbb Z$ is a UFD i.e. either $a+sqrt{-7}b$ or $c+sqrt{-7}d$ unit.
Next, let $1+sqrt{-7}=(a+sqrt{-7}b)(c+sqrt{-7}d)$ with $a,b,c,din Bbb Z$. Again taking norms $8=(a^2+7b^2)(c^2+7d^2)implies bd=0$ and both $b,d$ are not zero as $8$ has no integral square root. So without loss of generality assume $b=0$ and $dnot=0implies 8=a^2(c^2+7d^2)$ . Note that $d$ must be $+1,-1$ , otherwise $c^2+7d^2geq 28$. Also $cnot=0$ , as $7not |8$. Hence $c$ must be $+1,-1$ otherwise $c^2+7d^2geq 11$. Therefore $a=1,-1$ i.e. $a+sqrt{-7}b$ is unit.
Similarly $1-sqrt{-7}$ is irreducible.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
We only need $2$ is rred. Then $,2mid ww', 2nmid w,w',$ so $2$ is a non-prime irred so it's not a UFD.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 17:30
$begingroup$
Yeah, that's right , but I tried to prove only using definition of UFD.
$endgroup$
– UserS
Dec 6 '18 at 17:35
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3028562%2fmathbb-z-sqrt-7-is-not-a-ufd%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Hint $ $ It's simpler: UFDs are integrally closed, but it is not since $,(1+sqrt{-7})/2 $ is a root of $,x^2-x+2.,$ Said more simply it fails RRT = Rational Root Test, which holds true in any UFD.
Remark $ $ The RRT proof fails because some gcd it employs fails to exist in $,Bbb Z[sqrt{-7}].,$ Since gcds always exist in a UFD, we can use such gcd failure to prove rings are not UFDs. Let's use this to prove a more general case (for variety vs. traditional proofs).
Lemma $ Bbb Z[sqrt d]$ is not a UFD if $,color{#0a0}{dequiv 1pmod{!4}} $
Proof $ $ Assume it's a UFD. $ color{#0a0}{ww'}=(1!+!sqrt d)(1!-!sqrt d) = 1-d = color{#0a0}{4k},, color{#c00}{w} = 2-w',$
therefore the gcd product $ ,(2,color{#0a0}w)(2,color{#0a0}w') = (4,2w',2w,color{#0a0}{4k}) = 2(2,w',color{#c00}{w}) = 2(2,w')$
Cancelling $,(2,w'),Rightarrow, (2,w) = (2),Rightarrow, 2mid w,Rightarrow, w/2 = (1!+!sqrt d)/2in Bbb Z[sqrt d] Rightarrow!Leftarrow$
Further $ $ if $,w=sqrt{c^2d},$ then $,Bbb Z[w],$ UFD $,Rightarrow, cmid 1,,$ else $,(w/c)^2 = d,$ contra RRT (as above).
Alternatively by gcds $,(c,w)^2 = (c^2,cw,c^2d) = c(c,w),Rightarrow, (c,w) = (c),Rightarrow, cmid w,Rightarrow,cmid 1$
Combining yields a purely gcd-based proof of the following well-known fact.
Theorem $, Bbb Z[sqrt d], $ a UFD $,Rightarrow, d,$ squarefree and $,dnotequiv 1pmod{!4}$
Note $ $ The proof of the theorem also works if we instead assume the ring is a PID and read the tuples as ideals vs. gcds [since the proof uses only laws common to both: $ $ distributive, associative, commutative, and $(a,b,bc) = (a,b),$]. Then it yields $,(2,w),$ is noninvertible (so nonprincipal).
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
And more generally this idea goes through in $mathbf Z[sqrt{d}]$ for nonsquare $d equiv 1 bmod 4$, not just d = -7$.
$endgroup$
– KCd
Dec 6 '18 at 15:40
$begingroup$
@Downvoter If something is not clear then please feel welcome to ask questions and I will be happy to elaborate.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 17:25
$begingroup$
+1, I think $Z[sqrt d]$ is integrally closed if and only if $d$ congurent to $1$ module $4$.
$endgroup$
– UserS
Dec 6 '18 at 17:39
$begingroup$
@UserS: it is integrally closed if and only if $d$ is squarefree and $d$ is not congruent to $1 bmod 4$.
$endgroup$
– KCd
Dec 6 '18 at 17:56
$begingroup$
@UserS KCd is correct. I added a proof (using only gcds for variety vs. traditional proofs).
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 19:33
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Hint $ $ It's simpler: UFDs are integrally closed, but it is not since $,(1+sqrt{-7})/2 $ is a root of $,x^2-x+2.,$ Said more simply it fails RRT = Rational Root Test, which holds true in any UFD.
Remark $ $ The RRT proof fails because some gcd it employs fails to exist in $,Bbb Z[sqrt{-7}].,$ Since gcds always exist in a UFD, we can use such gcd failure to prove rings are not UFDs. Let's use this to prove a more general case (for variety vs. traditional proofs).
Lemma $ Bbb Z[sqrt d]$ is not a UFD if $,color{#0a0}{dequiv 1pmod{!4}} $
Proof $ $ Assume it's a UFD. $ color{#0a0}{ww'}=(1!+!sqrt d)(1!-!sqrt d) = 1-d = color{#0a0}{4k},, color{#c00}{w} = 2-w',$
therefore the gcd product $ ,(2,color{#0a0}w)(2,color{#0a0}w') = (4,2w',2w,color{#0a0}{4k}) = 2(2,w',color{#c00}{w}) = 2(2,w')$
Cancelling $,(2,w'),Rightarrow, (2,w) = (2),Rightarrow, 2mid w,Rightarrow, w/2 = (1!+!sqrt d)/2in Bbb Z[sqrt d] Rightarrow!Leftarrow$
Further $ $ if $,w=sqrt{c^2d},$ then $,Bbb Z[w],$ UFD $,Rightarrow, cmid 1,,$ else $,(w/c)^2 = d,$ contra RRT (as above).
Alternatively by gcds $,(c,w)^2 = (c^2,cw,c^2d) = c(c,w),Rightarrow, (c,w) = (c),Rightarrow, cmid w,Rightarrow,cmid 1$
Combining yields a purely gcd-based proof of the following well-known fact.
Theorem $, Bbb Z[sqrt d], $ a UFD $,Rightarrow, d,$ squarefree and $,dnotequiv 1pmod{!4}$
Note $ $ The proof of the theorem also works if we instead assume the ring is a PID and read the tuples as ideals vs. gcds [since the proof uses only laws common to both: $ $ distributive, associative, commutative, and $(a,b,bc) = (a,b),$]. Then it yields $,(2,w),$ is noninvertible (so nonprincipal).
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
And more generally this idea goes through in $mathbf Z[sqrt{d}]$ for nonsquare $d equiv 1 bmod 4$, not just d = -7$.
$endgroup$
– KCd
Dec 6 '18 at 15:40
$begingroup$
@Downvoter If something is not clear then please feel welcome to ask questions and I will be happy to elaborate.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 17:25
$begingroup$
+1, I think $Z[sqrt d]$ is integrally closed if and only if $d$ congurent to $1$ module $4$.
$endgroup$
– UserS
Dec 6 '18 at 17:39
$begingroup$
@UserS: it is integrally closed if and only if $d$ is squarefree and $d$ is not congruent to $1 bmod 4$.
$endgroup$
– KCd
Dec 6 '18 at 17:56
$begingroup$
@UserS KCd is correct. I added a proof (using only gcds for variety vs. traditional proofs).
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 19:33
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Hint $ $ It's simpler: UFDs are integrally closed, but it is not since $,(1+sqrt{-7})/2 $ is a root of $,x^2-x+2.,$ Said more simply it fails RRT = Rational Root Test, which holds true in any UFD.
Remark $ $ The RRT proof fails because some gcd it employs fails to exist in $,Bbb Z[sqrt{-7}].,$ Since gcds always exist in a UFD, we can use such gcd failure to prove rings are not UFDs. Let's use this to prove a more general case (for variety vs. traditional proofs).
Lemma $ Bbb Z[sqrt d]$ is not a UFD if $,color{#0a0}{dequiv 1pmod{!4}} $
Proof $ $ Assume it's a UFD. $ color{#0a0}{ww'}=(1!+!sqrt d)(1!-!sqrt d) = 1-d = color{#0a0}{4k},, color{#c00}{w} = 2-w',$
therefore the gcd product $ ,(2,color{#0a0}w)(2,color{#0a0}w') = (4,2w',2w,color{#0a0}{4k}) = 2(2,w',color{#c00}{w}) = 2(2,w')$
Cancelling $,(2,w'),Rightarrow, (2,w) = (2),Rightarrow, 2mid w,Rightarrow, w/2 = (1!+!sqrt d)/2in Bbb Z[sqrt d] Rightarrow!Leftarrow$
Further $ $ if $,w=sqrt{c^2d},$ then $,Bbb Z[w],$ UFD $,Rightarrow, cmid 1,,$ else $,(w/c)^2 = d,$ contra RRT (as above).
Alternatively by gcds $,(c,w)^2 = (c^2,cw,c^2d) = c(c,w),Rightarrow, (c,w) = (c),Rightarrow, cmid w,Rightarrow,cmid 1$
Combining yields a purely gcd-based proof of the following well-known fact.
Theorem $, Bbb Z[sqrt d], $ a UFD $,Rightarrow, d,$ squarefree and $,dnotequiv 1pmod{!4}$
Note $ $ The proof of the theorem also works if we instead assume the ring is a PID and read the tuples as ideals vs. gcds [since the proof uses only laws common to both: $ $ distributive, associative, commutative, and $(a,b,bc) = (a,b),$]. Then it yields $,(2,w),$ is noninvertible (so nonprincipal).
$endgroup$
Hint $ $ It's simpler: UFDs are integrally closed, but it is not since $,(1+sqrt{-7})/2 $ is a root of $,x^2-x+2.,$ Said more simply it fails RRT = Rational Root Test, which holds true in any UFD.
Remark $ $ The RRT proof fails because some gcd it employs fails to exist in $,Bbb Z[sqrt{-7}].,$ Since gcds always exist in a UFD, we can use such gcd failure to prove rings are not UFDs. Let's use this to prove a more general case (for variety vs. traditional proofs).
Lemma $ Bbb Z[sqrt d]$ is not a UFD if $,color{#0a0}{dequiv 1pmod{!4}} $
Proof $ $ Assume it's a UFD. $ color{#0a0}{ww'}=(1!+!sqrt d)(1!-!sqrt d) = 1-d = color{#0a0}{4k},, color{#c00}{w} = 2-w',$
therefore the gcd product $ ,(2,color{#0a0}w)(2,color{#0a0}w') = (4,2w',2w,color{#0a0}{4k}) = 2(2,w',color{#c00}{w}) = 2(2,w')$
Cancelling $,(2,w'),Rightarrow, (2,w) = (2),Rightarrow, 2mid w,Rightarrow, w/2 = (1!+!sqrt d)/2in Bbb Z[sqrt d] Rightarrow!Leftarrow$
Further $ $ if $,w=sqrt{c^2d},$ then $,Bbb Z[w],$ UFD $,Rightarrow, cmid 1,,$ else $,(w/c)^2 = d,$ contra RRT (as above).
Alternatively by gcds $,(c,w)^2 = (c^2,cw,c^2d) = c(c,w),Rightarrow, (c,w) = (c),Rightarrow, cmid w,Rightarrow,cmid 1$
Combining yields a purely gcd-based proof of the following well-known fact.
Theorem $, Bbb Z[sqrt d], $ a UFD $,Rightarrow, d,$ squarefree and $,dnotequiv 1pmod{!4}$
Note $ $ The proof of the theorem also works if we instead assume the ring is a PID and read the tuples as ideals vs. gcds [since the proof uses only laws common to both: $ $ distributive, associative, commutative, and $(a,b,bc) = (a,b),$]. Then it yields $,(2,w),$ is noninvertible (so nonprincipal).
edited Dec 6 '18 at 22:31
answered Dec 6 '18 at 14:47
Bill DubuqueBill Dubuque
212k29195650
212k29195650
$begingroup$
And more generally this idea goes through in $mathbf Z[sqrt{d}]$ for nonsquare $d equiv 1 bmod 4$, not just d = -7$.
$endgroup$
– KCd
Dec 6 '18 at 15:40
$begingroup$
@Downvoter If something is not clear then please feel welcome to ask questions and I will be happy to elaborate.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 17:25
$begingroup$
+1, I think $Z[sqrt d]$ is integrally closed if and only if $d$ congurent to $1$ module $4$.
$endgroup$
– UserS
Dec 6 '18 at 17:39
$begingroup$
@UserS: it is integrally closed if and only if $d$ is squarefree and $d$ is not congruent to $1 bmod 4$.
$endgroup$
– KCd
Dec 6 '18 at 17:56
$begingroup$
@UserS KCd is correct. I added a proof (using only gcds for variety vs. traditional proofs).
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 19:33
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
And more generally this idea goes through in $mathbf Z[sqrt{d}]$ for nonsquare $d equiv 1 bmod 4$, not just d = -7$.
$endgroup$
– KCd
Dec 6 '18 at 15:40
$begingroup$
@Downvoter If something is not clear then please feel welcome to ask questions and I will be happy to elaborate.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 17:25
$begingroup$
+1, I think $Z[sqrt d]$ is integrally closed if and only if $d$ congurent to $1$ module $4$.
$endgroup$
– UserS
Dec 6 '18 at 17:39
$begingroup$
@UserS: it is integrally closed if and only if $d$ is squarefree and $d$ is not congruent to $1 bmod 4$.
$endgroup$
– KCd
Dec 6 '18 at 17:56
$begingroup$
@UserS KCd is correct. I added a proof (using only gcds for variety vs. traditional proofs).
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 19:33
$begingroup$
And more generally this idea goes through in $mathbf Z[sqrt{d}]$ for nonsquare $d equiv 1 bmod 4$, not just d = -7$.
$endgroup$
– KCd
Dec 6 '18 at 15:40
$begingroup$
And more generally this idea goes through in $mathbf Z[sqrt{d}]$ for nonsquare $d equiv 1 bmod 4$, not just d = -7$.
$endgroup$
– KCd
Dec 6 '18 at 15:40
$begingroup$
@Downvoter If something is not clear then please feel welcome to ask questions and I will be happy to elaborate.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 17:25
$begingroup$
@Downvoter If something is not clear then please feel welcome to ask questions and I will be happy to elaborate.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 17:25
$begingroup$
+1, I think $Z[sqrt d]$ is integrally closed if and only if $d$ congurent to $1$ module $4$.
$endgroup$
– UserS
Dec 6 '18 at 17:39
$begingroup$
+1, I think $Z[sqrt d]$ is integrally closed if and only if $d$ congurent to $1$ module $4$.
$endgroup$
– UserS
Dec 6 '18 at 17:39
$begingroup$
@UserS: it is integrally closed if and only if $d$ is squarefree and $d$ is not congruent to $1 bmod 4$.
$endgroup$
– KCd
Dec 6 '18 at 17:56
$begingroup$
@UserS: it is integrally closed if and only if $d$ is squarefree and $d$ is not congruent to $1 bmod 4$.
$endgroup$
– KCd
Dec 6 '18 at 17:56
$begingroup$
@UserS KCd is correct. I added a proof (using only gcds for variety vs. traditional proofs).
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 19:33
$begingroup$
@UserS KCd is correct. I added a proof (using only gcds for variety vs. traditional proofs).
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 19:33
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
$$(1+sqrt{-7})×(1-sqrt{-7})=8=2×2×2.$$We show $2,1+sqrt{-7},1-sqrt{-7}$ are irreducibles.
So let $2=(a+sqrt{-7}b)(c+sqrt{-7}d)$ where $a,b,c,d in Bbb Z$, then taking norms $4=(a^2+7b^2)(c^2+7d^2)implies b=d=0$ , since for $e,fin Bbb Z$ and $fnot =0implies e^2+7f^2geq 7$. Also either $a$ or $c$ is $+1,-1$ as $2^2=4=(ac)^2$ and $Bbb Z$ is a UFD i.e. either $a+sqrt{-7}b$ or $c+sqrt{-7}d$ unit.
Next, let $1+sqrt{-7}=(a+sqrt{-7}b)(c+sqrt{-7}d)$ with $a,b,c,din Bbb Z$. Again taking norms $8=(a^2+7b^2)(c^2+7d^2)implies bd=0$ and both $b,d$ are not zero as $8$ has no integral square root. So without loss of generality assume $b=0$ and $dnot=0implies 8=a^2(c^2+7d^2)$ . Note that $d$ must be $+1,-1$ , otherwise $c^2+7d^2geq 28$. Also $cnot=0$ , as $7not |8$. Hence $c$ must be $+1,-1$ otherwise $c^2+7d^2geq 11$. Therefore $a=1,-1$ i.e. $a+sqrt{-7}b$ is unit.
Similarly $1-sqrt{-7}$ is irreducible.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
We only need $2$ is rred. Then $,2mid ww', 2nmid w,w',$ so $2$ is a non-prime irred so it's not a UFD.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 17:30
$begingroup$
Yeah, that's right , but I tried to prove only using definition of UFD.
$endgroup$
– UserS
Dec 6 '18 at 17:35
add a comment |
$begingroup$
$$(1+sqrt{-7})×(1-sqrt{-7})=8=2×2×2.$$We show $2,1+sqrt{-7},1-sqrt{-7}$ are irreducibles.
So let $2=(a+sqrt{-7}b)(c+sqrt{-7}d)$ where $a,b,c,d in Bbb Z$, then taking norms $4=(a^2+7b^2)(c^2+7d^2)implies b=d=0$ , since for $e,fin Bbb Z$ and $fnot =0implies e^2+7f^2geq 7$. Also either $a$ or $c$ is $+1,-1$ as $2^2=4=(ac)^2$ and $Bbb Z$ is a UFD i.e. either $a+sqrt{-7}b$ or $c+sqrt{-7}d$ unit.
Next, let $1+sqrt{-7}=(a+sqrt{-7}b)(c+sqrt{-7}d)$ with $a,b,c,din Bbb Z$. Again taking norms $8=(a^2+7b^2)(c^2+7d^2)implies bd=0$ and both $b,d$ are not zero as $8$ has no integral square root. So without loss of generality assume $b=0$ and $dnot=0implies 8=a^2(c^2+7d^2)$ . Note that $d$ must be $+1,-1$ , otherwise $c^2+7d^2geq 28$. Also $cnot=0$ , as $7not |8$. Hence $c$ must be $+1,-1$ otherwise $c^2+7d^2geq 11$. Therefore $a=1,-1$ i.e. $a+sqrt{-7}b$ is unit.
Similarly $1-sqrt{-7}$ is irreducible.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
We only need $2$ is rred. Then $,2mid ww', 2nmid w,w',$ so $2$ is a non-prime irred so it's not a UFD.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 17:30
$begingroup$
Yeah, that's right , but I tried to prove only using definition of UFD.
$endgroup$
– UserS
Dec 6 '18 at 17:35
add a comment |
$begingroup$
$$(1+sqrt{-7})×(1-sqrt{-7})=8=2×2×2.$$We show $2,1+sqrt{-7},1-sqrt{-7}$ are irreducibles.
So let $2=(a+sqrt{-7}b)(c+sqrt{-7}d)$ where $a,b,c,d in Bbb Z$, then taking norms $4=(a^2+7b^2)(c^2+7d^2)implies b=d=0$ , since for $e,fin Bbb Z$ and $fnot =0implies e^2+7f^2geq 7$. Also either $a$ or $c$ is $+1,-1$ as $2^2=4=(ac)^2$ and $Bbb Z$ is a UFD i.e. either $a+sqrt{-7}b$ or $c+sqrt{-7}d$ unit.
Next, let $1+sqrt{-7}=(a+sqrt{-7}b)(c+sqrt{-7}d)$ with $a,b,c,din Bbb Z$. Again taking norms $8=(a^2+7b^2)(c^2+7d^2)implies bd=0$ and both $b,d$ are not zero as $8$ has no integral square root. So without loss of generality assume $b=0$ and $dnot=0implies 8=a^2(c^2+7d^2)$ . Note that $d$ must be $+1,-1$ , otherwise $c^2+7d^2geq 28$. Also $cnot=0$ , as $7not |8$. Hence $c$ must be $+1,-1$ otherwise $c^2+7d^2geq 11$. Therefore $a=1,-1$ i.e. $a+sqrt{-7}b$ is unit.
Similarly $1-sqrt{-7}$ is irreducible.
$endgroup$
$$(1+sqrt{-7})×(1-sqrt{-7})=8=2×2×2.$$We show $2,1+sqrt{-7},1-sqrt{-7}$ are irreducibles.
So let $2=(a+sqrt{-7}b)(c+sqrt{-7}d)$ where $a,b,c,d in Bbb Z$, then taking norms $4=(a^2+7b^2)(c^2+7d^2)implies b=d=0$ , since for $e,fin Bbb Z$ and $fnot =0implies e^2+7f^2geq 7$. Also either $a$ or $c$ is $+1,-1$ as $2^2=4=(ac)^2$ and $Bbb Z$ is a UFD i.e. either $a+sqrt{-7}b$ or $c+sqrt{-7}d$ unit.
Next, let $1+sqrt{-7}=(a+sqrt{-7}b)(c+sqrt{-7}d)$ with $a,b,c,din Bbb Z$. Again taking norms $8=(a^2+7b^2)(c^2+7d^2)implies bd=0$ and both $b,d$ are not zero as $8$ has no integral square root. So without loss of generality assume $b=0$ and $dnot=0implies 8=a^2(c^2+7d^2)$ . Note that $d$ must be $+1,-1$ , otherwise $c^2+7d^2geq 28$. Also $cnot=0$ , as $7not |8$. Hence $c$ must be $+1,-1$ otherwise $c^2+7d^2geq 11$. Therefore $a=1,-1$ i.e. $a+sqrt{-7}b$ is unit.
Similarly $1-sqrt{-7}$ is irreducible.
edited Dec 6 '18 at 15:49
answered Dec 6 '18 at 15:38
UserSUserS
1,5541112
1,5541112
$begingroup$
We only need $2$ is rred. Then $,2mid ww', 2nmid w,w',$ so $2$ is a non-prime irred so it's not a UFD.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 17:30
$begingroup$
Yeah, that's right , but I tried to prove only using definition of UFD.
$endgroup$
– UserS
Dec 6 '18 at 17:35
add a comment |
$begingroup$
We only need $2$ is rred. Then $,2mid ww', 2nmid w,w',$ so $2$ is a non-prime irred so it's not a UFD.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 17:30
$begingroup$
Yeah, that's right , but I tried to prove only using definition of UFD.
$endgroup$
– UserS
Dec 6 '18 at 17:35
$begingroup$
We only need $2$ is rred. Then $,2mid ww', 2nmid w,w',$ so $2$ is a non-prime irred so it's not a UFD.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 17:30
$begingroup$
We only need $2$ is rred. Then $,2mid ww', 2nmid w,w',$ so $2$ is a non-prime irred so it's not a UFD.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 17:30
$begingroup$
Yeah, that's right , but I tried to prove only using definition of UFD.
$endgroup$
– UserS
Dec 6 '18 at 17:35
$begingroup$
Yeah, that's right , but I tried to prove only using definition of UFD.
$endgroup$
– UserS
Dec 6 '18 at 17:35
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3028562%2fmathbb-z-sqrt-7-is-not-a-ufd%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Please include your thoughts and efforts on the problem.
$endgroup$
– Servaes
Dec 6 '18 at 14:38
$begingroup$
Hint: $3^2+7=4^2$.
$endgroup$
– egreg
Dec 6 '18 at 14:55
1
$begingroup$
Hint: $(1+sqrt{-7})(1-sqrt{-7})$.
$endgroup$
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Dec 6 '18 at 15:32
1
$begingroup$
See also this closedly related question.
$endgroup$
– Bill Dubuque
Dec 6 '18 at 20:24