Characteristic or a finite field is a prime number?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the characteristic of finite fields, specifically whether it must be a prime number. Participants explore the implications of the characteristic being composite and the consequences for field properties.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that the characteristic of a finite field must be a prime number, citing that if it were composite, it would lead to a nontrivial zero-divisor.
  • One participant explains that if the characteristic is represented as p, and p can be expressed as a product of two integers n and m, then this leads to a contradiction in the field's properties.
  • Another participant emphasizes that if the sum of 1 added n times equals zero, and n is composite, then it implies that either a or b must be zero, contradicting the minimality of p.
  • Some participants question the clarity of proofs found in literature, suggesting that the mapping between integers and field elements needs to be explicitly defined to avoid confusion.
  • There are repeated requests for clarification on the significance of nontrivial zero-divisors in the context of finite fields.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that the characteristic cannot be zero and that a composite characteristic leads to contradictions. However, the discussion remains unresolved regarding the clarity of proofs and the implications of zero-divisors.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note limitations in the clarity of existing proofs and the need for explicit definitions in mappings, which may affect the understanding of the arguments presented.

el3orian
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Why is the characteristic of a finite field a prime number?!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A finite field clearly has a characteristic (among the elements 1, 1 + 1, 1 + 1 + 1, ... there must be two that equal one another, since we have only finitely many elements in the field). Let p be the least number of ones we need to add up in order to get 0. Suppose p = nm with 1 < n, m < p (i.e. p is not prime). Then

0 = 1 + 1 ... + 1 (p times) = p = nm = (1 + ... + 1)(1 + ... + 1) := ab

where a is the first paranthesis (containing n ones) and b is the second paranthesis (containing m ones). But since we're in a field, this implies that either a or b is 0, contradicting the fact that p minimal.
 
Last edited:
Short (but same) answer: char(F) is clearly not zero. If it were composite, then it's easy to find a nontrivial zero-divisor.
 
map the integers Z to R by sending 1 to 1. if n goes to zero, this induces an injection fron Z/n to R. but since R is a domain, so is Z/n, hence n is prime.
 
Hurkyl said:
Short (but same) answer: char(F) is clearly not zero. If it were composite, then it's easy to find a nontrivial zero-divisor.

Would you mind expanding on this explanation a bit? What is the significance of a nontrivial zero-divisor? Thanks!
 
subGiambi said:
Would you mind expanding on this explanation a bit? What is the significance of a nontrivial zero-divisor? Thanks!
How can a field have a nontrivial zero-divisor?
 
if 1+1+...+1, n times =0, and n is a product of a and b, then ab = 0 in your field, so one of a or b is already zero, so some smaller sum of 1's is already zero.
 
this is the same as my response that if under the map Z---R sending 1 to 1, ab goes to zero, then look at what a and b go to. the product of their images is zero, so one of them is.

(the point is that in a field if AB=0 then either A=0 or B=0.)
 
in dummit and foote's abstract algebra the proof is not very clear i guess. he did not define the binary operation between positive integers and members of the field F.A mapping should be defined to make it clear.Also (1+1+1...ntimes).(1+1+...mtimes) can be (1+1+...mn times) clearly due to properties of the field so it is evident that this step answers all the questions asked above,is'nt it??
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K