Constructing a field of 4 elements

  • Thread starter Thread starter PsychonautQQ
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Elements Field
Click For Summary
The polynomial x^2+x+1 is irreducible in Z mod 2, leading to the construction of the field F = Z_2[x] / <x^2 + x + 1>, which consists of the elements {0, 1, t, 1+t} where t^2 = t + 1. The choice of this polynomial may not be intuitive, as finding irreducible polynomials is a complex topic that often requires checking multiple candidates. The equation t^2 = t + 1 arises from the definition of the field, where -t is equivalent to t in mod 2 arithmetic. The existence of irreducible polynomials for constructing fields is guaranteed, but finding them can be challenging, often necessitating computational tools or extensive case checking. Understanding these concepts is crucial for working with finite fields and their properties.
PsychonautQQ
Messages
781
Reaction score
10
This is from an example in my textbook:

"The polynomial x^2+x+1 has no root in Z mod 2, and so is irreducible. Hence the required field is:

F = Z_2[x] / <x^2 + x + 1> = {a + bt | a,b are elements of Z_2; t^2+t+1 = 0}.

Thus F = {0, 1, t, 1+t} and t^2 = t + 1."

I have two questions.
My first question is if this a exercise problem rather than an example, I would have had no idea to grab the polynomial x^2+x+1 in Z mod 2. Can somebody explain why this was apparently so obvious?

My next question is why is t^2 = t + 1? Wouldn't t^2 = -t - 1?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
t+1=-t-1 (mod 2)?
 
  • Like
Likes PsychonautQQ
Well, to obtain a field of ##p^n## elements, you want to quotient ##\mathbb{F}_p[X]## by an irreducible polynomial of degree ##n##. I assume that's clear and you're really asking how to find such a polynomial. Well, that is actually a hard question and a topic of research. It has been proven (and the proof is not trivial!) that such a polynomial always exists. But the proof doesn't really give a hint on how to find it. So what you could always do is check all cases. With low degree polynomials this is not hard. For example, you list all the second degree polynomials:

X^2,~X^2 + 1,~X^2+X,~X^2 + X + 1

and you check whether they are irreducible. Only the last one is, so that's your polynomial. You can do the same with third degree, fourth degree, etc. To get beyond that is going to be difficult by hand. So you can always consult a computer algebra system like GAP http://www.gap-system.org Currently, people have also collected giant lists of irreducible polynomials, as no clever algorithm exists.
 
  • Like
Likes lpetrich and PsychonautQQ
The number of degree-n irreducible polynomials for GF(p) is given by
$$ \frac{1}{n} \sum_{m \text{ div } n} \mu(n/m) p^m $$
where μ is the Moebius mu function: 0 if n has repeated prime factors, (-1)^(number of factors) if those factors are all unique.

That number gets big *very* quickly with increasing n; it tends to pn/n. For GF(2): A001037 - OEIS
 
  • Like
Likes PsychonautQQ
the usual way to proceed to prove existence of such a field, is to use the fact that the multiplicative group of such a field is cyclic, hence if q = p^n, the elements of the field all satisfy the polynomial X^q - X = 0. Conversely it is not hard to show that in any splitting field for that polynomial, the set of all its q (necessarily distinct) roots forms a field. see van der waerden's modern algebra, chapter 5 section 37. I don't know if this is as explicit as what you want, since your discussion goes along the lines of finding the minimal polynomial for a primitive element for this splitting field extension. This seems however like a fairly elementary proof of existence of such a field and hence of such a polynomial.
 
  • Like
Likes PsychonautQQ
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

Replies
48
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
862
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
840
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K