MHB Introducing Quadratic Residues: Real World Examples & Law of Reciprocity

  • Thread starter Thread starter matqkks
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Quadratic
Click For Summary
Quadratic residues are introduced as a significant concept in number theory, particularly through their connection to the Law of Quadratic Reciprocity, which is foundational in the field. The discussion highlights that quadratic residues can be understood within the context of finite fields, specifically $\Bbb Z_p$, where they form a subgroup of the group of units. The mapping from non-zero elements to their squares demonstrates the structure and properties of these residues, including their role in determining "positive" elements analogous to real numbers. The relationship between quadratic residues and group theory is emphasized, illustrating their utility in simplifying calculations through parity arguments. Overall, quadratic residues are not only mathematically intriguing but also essential for deeper explorations in number theory.
matqkks
Messages
280
Reaction score
5
What is the most motivating way to introduce quadratic residues? Are there any real life examples of quadratic residues?
Why is the Law of Quadratic Reciprocity considered as one of the most important in number theory?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
(I don't know an answer to the first one, not being a teacher in any respect)

This is an interesting question. I don't recall any direct consequence(s) of it, but thinking of a more general Langland programs, for example, although the consequences are complicated.

The law of quadratic residues is one of the non-trivial results in elementary number theory. Several results of algebraic and analytic number theory lies on this theorem. In fact, there are some open conjectures regarding a smooth generalization of this result, take for example, Hilbert's 9-th problem.
 
Last edited:
Here is one aspect of quadratic residues I always found fascinating:

Consider the field $\Bbb Z_p$.

Since this *is* a field, its group of units is precisely the set of non-zero elements, $\Bbb Z_p^{\ast}$.

Since this is a finite group, any subset closed under multiplication is a subgroup.

If we denote the set of (non-zero) quadratic resides by $R$, it is clear $R$ is a subgroup of the group of units since if:

$x,y \in R$, we have $x = a^2, y = b^2$ for some $a,b \in \Bbb Z_p^{\ast}$, thus:

$ab \in \Bbb Z_p^{\ast}$ (since any field is, of course, an integral domain), and:

$xy = (a^2)(b^2) = (ab)^2 \implies xy \in R$ (because multiplication in $\Bbb Z_p^{\ast}$ is commutative).

From the above, it should be clear that the map $\phi: x \to x^2$ is a surjective group homomorphism from $\Bbb Z_p^{\ast} \to R$. A natural question to ask, then, is: what is its kernel?

Clearly $1$ is the identity of $R$ ($1 \in R$ since $1 = 1\ast1 = 1^2$). Thus finding the kernel is the same as finding the roots of $x^2 - 1$ in $\Bbb Z_p^{\ast}$. Since $\Bbb Z_p$ is a field, and $x^2 - 1 \in \Bbb Z_p[x]$, we know this equation can have at most 2 roots. In fact, if $p \neq 2$, we have EXACTLY two roots: 1 and -1 (= p-1).

So for an odd prime $p$, group theory tells us that:

$[\Bbb Z_p^{\ast}:R] = |\text{ker}(\phi)| = 2$, that is:

$|R| = \frac{p-1}{2}$.

This, in effect, let's us choose "positive" elements of a finite field: just as in the case of real numbers, the "positive" elements are the ones that be written as the square of another (non-zero) element of the field. The rules for the cosets $R$ and $-R$ are the same as the rules we learned for positive and negative real numbers under "ordinary" multiplication:

$R\ast R = R$
$R \ast -R = -R \ast R = -R$
$-R \ast -R = R$.

This allows us to use "parity" arguments in some cases, saving time and sometimes considerable calculation.
 
Deveno said:
Here is one aspect of quadratic residues I always found fascinating:

Consider the field $\Bbb Z_p$.

Since this *is* a field, its group of units is precisely the set of non-zero elements, $\Bbb Z_p^{\ast}$.

Since this is a finite group, any subset closed under multiplication is a subgroup.

If we denote the set of (non-zero) quadratic resides by $R$, it is clear $R$ is a subgroup of the group of units since if:

$x,y \in R$, we have $x = a^2, y = b^2$ for some $a,b \in \Bbb Z_p^{\ast}$, thus:

$ab \in \Bbb Z_p^{\ast}$ (since any field is, of course, an integral domain), and:

$xy = (a^2)(b^2) = (ab)^2 \implies xy \in R$ (because multiplication in $\Bbb Z_p^{\ast}$ is commutative).

From the above, it should be clear that the map $\phi: x \to x^2$ is a surjective group homomorphism from $\Bbb Z_p^{\ast} \to R$. A natural question to ask, then, is: what is its kernel?

Clearly $1$ is the identity of $R$ ($1 \in R$ since $1 = 1\ast1 = 1^2$). Thus finding the kernel is the same as finding the roots of $x^2 - 1$ in $\Bbb Z_p^{\ast}$. Since $\Bbb Z_p$ is a field, and $x^2 - 1 \in \Bbb Z_p[x]$, we know this equation can have at most 2 roots. In fact, if $p \neq 2$, we have EXACTLY two roots: 1 and -1 (= p-1).

So for an odd prime $p$, group theory tells us that:

$[\Bbb Z_p^{\ast}:R] = |\text{ker}(\phi)| = 2$, that is:

$|R| = \frac{p-1}{2}$.

This, in effect, let's us choose "positive" elements of a finite field: just as in the case of real numbers, the "positive" elements are the ones that be written as the square of another (non-zero) element of the field. The rules for the cosets $R$ and $-R$ are the same as the rules we learned for positive and negative real numbers under "ordinary" multiplication:

$R\ast R = R$
$R \ast -R = -R \ast R = -R$
$-R \ast -R = R$.

This allows us to use "parity" arguments in some cases, saving time and sometimes considerable calculation.
Great expository post!
 
Thread 'Erroneously  finding discrepancy in transpose rule'
Obviously, there is something elementary I am missing here. To form the transpose of a matrix, one exchanges rows and columns, so the transpose of a scalar, considered as (or isomorphic to) a one-entry matrix, should stay the same, including if the scalar is a complex number. On the other hand, in the isomorphism between the complex plane and the real plane, a complex number a+bi corresponds to a matrix in the real plane; taking the transpose we get which then corresponds to a-bi...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K