Calculate the discriminant of a basis [Number Theory]

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
17 replies · 3K views
Firepanda
Messages
425
Reaction score
0
Question:

df91ts.png


The needed proposition and two examples:

1zb9px4.png



This is as far as I have got:

zn0m8h.jpg


I need to reduce this (I think) so I can represent is as a matrix! Any idea on how to do this?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
How about rewriting your last equation as
[tex](\zeta - 1)Dp(\zeta) = p\zeta^{p-1}[/tex] and then taking norms of both sides?
 
I'm unsure on how to calculate [itex]N(p\zeta^{p-1})[/itex]

[itex]N(\zeta - 1) = 5[/itex] though.
 
[itex]N(\zeta - 1)[/itex] isn't 5 - not unless p=5.

As for [itex]N(p \zeta^{p-1})[/itex], this is just [itex]N(p)N(\zeta)^{p-1}[/itex], and [itex]N(p)[/itex] and [itex]N(\zeta)[/itex] are really easy to compute.
 
Providing [itex]N(\zeta - 1)=p[/itex] (is this easy to prove?) then I also get [itex]N(p)=p^{2}[/itex] and [itex]N(\zeta)=1[/itex]

So my overall answer should be p?
 
[itex]N(p)[/itex] should be [itex]p^{p-1}[/itex].

And as for computing [itex]N(\zeta-1)[/itex], you can either do it the determinant way (and do a bunch of row operations), or you could use the differentiation trick you used above except with [itex]t=1[/itex] isntead of [itex]t=\zeta[/itex].
 
Hmm when t=1 I get the denominator as 0, am I not using it right?
 
Notice that
[tex]t^p - 1 = (t-1)(t-\zeta)\cdots(t-\zeta^{p-1})[/tex] so the t-1 in the denominator gets canceled off.

Edit:
Actually, we don't want to be looking at (t^p-1)/(t-1), rather just at t^p-1. Differentiate both sides of the equation above and plug in t=1.
 
Just to be clear you want me to differentiate both sides of [itex]t^p - 1 = (t-1)(t-\zeta)\cdots(t-\zeta^{p-1})[/itex]?

Unsure on how to do the RHS without getting messy!
 
Yes, that's what I want you to differentiate. It won't be too messy (especially if you plug in t=1 after you differentiate). :)
 
Hmm I'll admit I'm not sure how to go about doing the RHS!

Do I need to? Why can't I use just the differential of the LHS?
 
If you differentiate the RHS and plug in t=1, everything will immediately vanish except for the first term, which becomes
[tex](1-\zeta)(1-\zeta^2)\cdots(1-\zeta^{p-1}).[/tex]
This really just follows from the product rule of differentiation.
 
morphism said:
If you differentiate the RHS and plug in t=1, everything will immediately vanish except for the first term, which becomes
[tex](1-\zeta)(1-\zeta^2)\cdots(1-\zeta^{p-1}).[/tex]
This really just follows from the product rule of differentiation.

Ah I see, sorry I've never used the product rule for more than 2 terms before, I get it now!

so [itex]p = (1-\zeta)(1-\zeta^2)\cdots(1-\zeta^{p-1})[/itex]

i suppose we want to rearrange this?
 
No real rearrangement is necessary. Just notice that the RHS is also [itex](\zeta - 1)(\zeta^2 - 1) \cdots (\zeta^{p-1}-1)[/itex] (because p is odd), which is just the product of all the conjugates of [itex]\zeta-1[/itex], a.k.a. _____
 
Norm!

So the norm is p? Havn't we got a few too many conjugates though?
 
Yes, the norm is p, and no we have the right amount of conjugates! This is because the conjugates of [itex]\zeta[/itex] are [itex]\zeta[/itex] itself and [itex]\zeta^2, \ldots, \zeta^{p-1}[/itex]. Try to actually write down a rigorous proof, using minimal polynomials. It should be easy.
 
Ok thanks :)

Is N(p) = p^p-1 since we can write the matrix as a matrix with only p along the diagonal?
 
Firepanda said:
Ok thanks :)

Is N(p) = p^p-1 since we can write the matrix as a matrix with only p along the diagonal?
Yup!