Definition of a Euclidean Domain ....

In summary, the definition of a Euclidean Domain varies between the books "The Basics of Abstract Algebra" by Bland and "Abstract Algebra" by Dummit and Foote. Bland defines it using two conditions, while Dummit and Foote only use one of Bland's conditions. This difference in definition may result in some structures being recognized as Euclidean Domains under Dummit and Foote's definition, but not under Bland's definition. However, both definitions still result in a Euclidean Domain with a norm function, which is an important property in the study of ideals and algebraic-number theory.
  • #1
Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
3,998
48
In the book "The Basics of Abstract Algebra" Bland defines a Euclidean Domain using two conditions as follows:View attachment 8256
View attachment 8257In the book "Abstract Algebra"by Dummit and Foote we find that a Euclidean Domain is defined using only one of Bland's conditions ... as follows:View attachment 8258What are the consequences of these different definitions ... for example does D&F's definition allow some structures to be Euclidean Domains that are not recognized as such under Bland's definition ...Peter
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #3
Let $N$ be the norm of the integral domain $R$ in F&D’s definition. Define another norm $N^\ast$ by
$$N^\ast(a)\ =\ \min_{b\in R\setminus\left\{0_R\right\}}N(ab).$$
Then $R$ is still a Euclidean domain with norm $N^\ast$ and $N^\ast$ is also a Euclidean valuation in Bland’s definition.

The most important property of a Euclidean domain is the second one in Bland; many results about Euclidean domains involve only the second property but not the first. IMHO the importance of the first property only shows up in the study of ideals and algebraic-number theory.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top