Why is $w_p(x+y) \geq m$ and not $w_p(x+y) = m$ for $x,y \in \mathbb{Q}_p$?

  • MHB
  • Thread starter evinda
  • Start date
In summary, additive p-adic valuation is a mathematical concept that assigns a value to a number based on the highest power of a prime number in its prime factorization. It is calculated by determining the highest power of the prime number and is useful in number theory and algebraic geometry. It differs from other valuations in that it focuses on the prime factorization rather than overall magnitude. It can also be extended to other number systems and algebraic structures where prime factorization applies.
  • #1
evinda
Gold Member
MHB
3,836
0
Hello! (Wave)

The additive $p-$ adic valuation of $\mathbb{Q}_p$:

$$w_p: \left\{\begin{matrix}
\mathbb{Q}_p \rightarrow \mathbb{Z} \cup \{\infty\}\\
p^m u \mapsto m\\
0 \mapsto \infty
\end{matrix}\right.$$

$$\forall x,y \in \mathbb{Q}: w_p(x+y) \geq \min \{ w_p(x), w_p(y)\}$$

If $w_p(x) \neq w_p(y)$, then the equality stands.

This is the proof, according to my notes:

$$x=p^m u_1 | u_1 \in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$$

$$y=p^n u^2 | u_2 \in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$$

$$m,n \in \mathbb{N}$$

Without loss of generality, we suppose that $m \leq n$.

$$x+y=p^m(u_1+p^{n-m}u_2)$$

$$w_p(x+y) \geq m$$

If $n>m$, then $u_1+p^{n-m}u_2 \in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$

In this case:

$$w_p(x+y)=m=\min \{ w_p(x), w_p(y) \}$$

If $n=m$, $\displaystyle{ w_p(x+y) \geq n=m=\min \{ w_p(x), w_p(y)\} }$

Could you explain me why it is : $w_p(x+y) \geq m$ and not $w_p(x+y)=m$ ? (Thinking)
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
First of all, your notation sucks.

$p$-adic valuation is usually denoted by $\nu_p(\bullet)$, and the $p$-adic norm as $|\bullet |_p$.

We know by definition that $x = p^{\nu_p(x)} \cdot a$ and $y = p^{\nu_p(y)} \cdot b$. Now $x + y = p^{\nu_p(x)} \cdot a + p^{\nu_p(y)} \cdot b$. Without loss of generality, assume $\nu_p(x) > \nu_p(y)$, then $x + y = p^{\nu_p(x)} \cdot (p^{\nu_p(x)-\nu_p(y)} \cdot a + b)$. Now this factor $p^{\nu_p(x)-\nu_p(y)} \cdot a + b$ might be divisible by $p^k$ for some $k > 0$, who knows? So the largest $n$ such that $x + y$ is divisible by $p^n$ is *at least* $\nu_p(x)$, but it might be larger. Hence $\nu_p(x + y) \geq \nu_p(x) = \text{min}(\nu_p(x), \nu_p(y))$. From this one derives that $|x + y|_p \leq \text{max}(|x|_p, |y|_p)$.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
mathbalarka said:
$p$-adic valuation is usually denoted by $\nu_p(\bullet)$, and the $p$-adic norm as $|\bullet |_p$.

We know by definition that $x = p^{\nu_p(x)} \cdot a$ and $y = p^{\nu_p(y)} \cdot b$. Now $x + y = p^{\nu_p(x)} \cdot a + p^{\nu_p(y)} \cdot b$. Without loss of generality, assume $\nu_p(x) > \nu_p(y)$, then $x + y = p^{\nu_p(x)} \cdot (p^{\nu_p(x)-\nu_p(y)} \cdot a + b)$. Now this factor $p^{\nu_p(x)-\nu_p(y)} \cdot a + b$ might be divisible by $p^k$ for some $k > 0$, who knows? So the largest $n$ such that $x + y$ is divisible by $p^n$ is *at least* $\nu_p(x)$, but it might be larger. Hence $\nu_p(x + y) \geq \nu_p(x) = \text{min}(\nu_p(x) + \nu_p(y))$. From this one derives that $|x + y|_p \leq \text{max}(|x|_p, |y|_p)$.

Could you explain me how it can be that the factor $p^{\nu_p(x)-\nu_p(y)} \cdot a + b$ might be divisible by $p^k$ for some $k > 0$ ?

In which case would it be like that? (Thinking) (Worried)
 
  • #4
Say $b = p^k$ for some $k \leq \nu_p(x) - \nu_p(y)$. Then $p^{\nu_p(x) - \nu_p(y)} + b$ is divisible by $p^k$.
 
  • #5
mathbalarka said:
Say $b = p^k$ for some $k \leq \nu_p(x) - \nu_p(y)$. Then $p^{\nu_p(x) - \nu_p(y)} + b$ is divisible by $p^k$.

According to my notes, $a,b \in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$, so shouldn't it be:

$$b \in \{ 1,2, \dots, p-1\}$$
? Or am I wrong? (Worried)
 
  • #6
Yes, right, my bad. I wasn't paying attention. Forget what I've said above.

But $p^{\nu_p(x) - \nu_p(y)} \cdot a + b$ might still be divisible by a power of $p$. Consider, for example, $3 + 3$. None of the two $3$s are divsible by $6$, but $3 + 3 = 6$ is.
 

1. What is the definition of additive p-adic valuation?

Additive p-adic valuation is a mathematical concept used to measure the size of a number in terms of its prime factorization. It assigns a value to a number based on the highest power of a prime number, p, that divides evenly into that number.

2. How is additive p-adic valuation calculated?

To calculate the additive p-adic valuation of a number, you must first factor the number into its prime factors. Then, determine the highest power of the prime number, p, that appears in the factorization. The additive p-adic valuation is equal to this power.

3. What is the significance of additive p-adic valuation?

Additive p-adic valuation is useful in number theory and algebraic geometry, as it allows for a more precise measurement of the size of numbers. It also plays a role in the study of p-adic numbers and their properties.

4. How does additive p-adic valuation differ from other valuations?

Additive p-adic valuation differs from other valuations, such as the absolute value or multiplicative p-adic valuation, in that it assigns a value based on the prime factorization of a number rather than its overall magnitude. This can lead to different results for certain numbers.

5. Can additive p-adic valuation be extended to other number systems?

Yes, additive p-adic valuation can be extended to other number systems, such as the p-adic numbers, which are an extension of the rational numbers. It can also be generalized to other algebraic structures, such as rings and fields, where the concept of prime factorization still applies.

Similar threads

  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
987
  • General Math
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • General Math
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • General Math
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • General Math
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
10
Views
2K
Back
Top