How do I prove the existence of this norm?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter zarei175
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Existence Norm
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving the existence of a non-Archimedean norm on a fixed local field k, where the norm is defined such that |x|=qm for some integer m and q=pr, with p as a prime element of k. The properties of this norm include |x|≥0 and the non-Archimedean condition |x+y|≤max{|x|,|y|}. Participants seek clarification on how to demonstrate both the existence of this norm and its non-Archimedean nature, referencing specific notes by Pete Clark for foundational understanding.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of local fields in number theory
  • Familiarity with non-Archimedean norms
  • Knowledge of prime elements in algebraic structures
  • Basic concepts of mathematical proofs and definitions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of non-Archimedean norms in detail
  • Review the first 8-10 pages of Pete Clark's notes on local fields
  • Explore examples of local fields and their norms
  • Learn about the implications of the maximum condition in non-Archimedean norms
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, particularly those specializing in number theory and algebra, as well as students seeking to deepen their understanding of local fields and non-Archimedean norms.

zarei175
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I am reading an article[1] that states:

Let k be a fixed local field. Then there is an integer q=pr, where p is a fixed prime element of k and r is a positive integer, and a norm |.| on k such that for all x∈k we have |x|≥0 and for each x∈k\{0} we get |x|=qm for some integer m. This norm is non-Archimedean, that is |x+y|≤max{|x|,|y|} for all x,y∈k and |x+y|=max{|x|,|y|} whenever |x|≠|y|.

how do i prove the existence of this norm?

and

how to prove that the norm is non-Archimedean?

[1]: http://docdro.id/11a73
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I recommend say the first 8-10 pages of these notes of Pete Clark:

http://math.uga.edu/~pete/8410FULL.pdf
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: zarei175
Thank you mathwonk.. I read these pages, but my question is different.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K