Isomorphic Math Help: Proving Quotient Ring and Polynomial Irreducibility

  • Thread starter Oxymoron
  • Start date
In summary, the polynomial x^2+x+1 is irreducible over \mathbb{Z}_2 and has no roots. The field \mathbb{Z}_2[x]/(x^2+x+1) is isomorphic to the field \mathbb{C} of complex numbers.
  • #1
Oxymoron
870
0
Questions

1) Let [itex]x^2-x+1[/itex] be the ideal for [itex]\mathbb{R}[x][/itex] generated by the polynomial [itex]x^2-x+1[/itex]. Show that the quotient ring [itex]\mathbb{R}[x]/(x^2-x+1)[/itex] is isomorphic to the field [itex]\mathbb{C}[/itex] of complex numbers.

2) Show that the polynomial [itex]x^2+x+1[/itex] is irreducible over [itex]\mathbb{Z}_2[/itex].
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Yep, they look like questions, all right.
 
  • #3
Solution

The isomorphism is going to map solutions [itex]x[/itex] of the polynomial [itex]x^2-x+1[/itex] to a corresponding complex number [itex]\lambda[/itex] which is also a solution of the equation [itex]\lambda^2 - \lambda +1[/itex].

That is

[tex]a + bx \rightarrow a + b\lambda[/tex]

where [itex]a+bx[/itex] is a linear factor of [itex]x^2-x+1[/itex] and [itex]a, b \in \mathbb{R}[/itex].

So take [itex]x \in \mathbb{R}[x]/(x^2-x+1) [/itex]. Then [itex]x[/itex] is a solution of [itex]x^2-x+1 = 0[/itex]. Now we take a [itex]\lambda \in \mathbb{C}[/itex] such that [itex]\lambda[/itex] solves [itex]\lambda^2 -\lambda + 1[/itex]. To prove that this is an isomorphism we need to show

[tex](a+bx)(c+dx) \rightarrow (a+b\lambda)(c+d\lambda)[/tex]

[tex](a+bx)(c+dx) = (ac + (bc+ad)x + bdx^2) [/tex]

[tex](a+b\lambda)(c+d\lambda) = ac + (bc+ad)\lambda +bd\lambda^2[/tex]
 
  • #4
What's the kernel of the map R[x] --> C that maps x to λ? Is it surjective? Know any theorems about homomorphisms?
 
  • #5
The polynomial [itex]x^2-x+1[/itex] is irreducible over [itex]\mathbb{R}[/itex] since if the polynomial was reducible it would have a linear factor in [itex]\mathbb{R}[x][/itex] and hence a zero in [itex]\mathbb{R}[/itex]. But the polynomial has no zeroes hence factorization is impossible.

Because of this fact, the quotient ring [itex]\mathbb{R}[x]/(x^2-x+1)[/itex] is a field.

I now look for isomorphisms that take elements in the quotient ring to elements of the complex numbers.

[tex]\phi : \mathbb{R}[x]/(x^2-x+1) \rightarrow \mathbb{C}[/tex]

An element in the quotient ring will be of the form [itex](a+bx)[/itex], where [itex]x[/itex] is a solution to [itex]x^2-x+1=0[/itex]. And an element of the complex numbers will be of the form [itex](a+b\lambda)[/itex] where [itex]\lambda[/itex] is a solution to [itex]\lambda^2-\lambda+1=0[/itex].

Now [itex]\phi[/itex] is an isomorphism if it is a homomorphism with respect to addition and multiplication. That is

[tex]\phi(a+b) = \phi(a') + \phi(b')[/tex]
[tex]\phi(ab) = \phi(a')\phi(b')[/tex]

Where [itex]a,b[/itex] are elements of the quotient ring and [itex]a',b'[/itex] are elements of the complex numbers.

The kernel of this map is that element of the quotient ring which maps to [itex]0 \in \mathbb{C}[/itex]. That is, [itex]\ker{\phi} = x[/itex] where [itex]x[/itex] is the solution to [itex]x^2-x+1=0[/itex].

Im not sure if all this so far is necessary to show an isomorphism exists, but I wrote this just to make sure my reasoning is correct. It probably isn't, but someone can point that one out.


Now it suffices to show that [itex]\phi(ab) = \phi(a')\phi(b')[/itex].

[tex]\phi(ab) = \phi((a+bx)(c+dx)) [/tex]
[tex]= \phi(ac + (bc+ad)x + bdx^2)[/tex]
[tex]= \phi(ac + (bc+ad)x + bd(x-1))[/tex]
[tex]= \phi(ac + (bc+ad)x + bdx - bd)[/tex]
[tex]= \phi(ac + (bc+ad-bd)x + bd)[/tex]

And

[tex]\phi(a')\phi(b') = \phi(a'+b'\lambda)\phi(c'+d'\lambda)[/tex]
[tex]= \phi(a'c' + (b'c' + a'd')\lambda + b'd'\lambda^2)[/tex]
[tex]= \phi(a'c' + (b'c' + a'd')\lambda + b'd'(\lambda -1))[/tex]
[tex]= \phi(a'c' + (b'c' + a'd' - b'd')\lambda + b'd')[/tex]

And so [itex]\phi(ab) = \phi(a')\phi(b')[/itex]



Also note that if we divide [itex]bdx^2 + (bc+ad)x + ac[/itex] by [itex]x^2-x+1[/itex] using long division we obtain

[tex]ac + (bc+ad-bd)x + bd = \phi^{-1}\phi(ab)[/tex]

Not sure what all this means though.
 
Last edited:
  • #6
Solution 2

We are considering the polynomial [itex]x^2+x+1[/itex] in [itex]\mathbb{Z}_2[/itex]. It suffices to show that it has no roots: [itex]\mathbb{Z}_2 = \{0,1\}[/itex]

[tex]0^2+0+1 = 1 \neq 0[/tex]

[tex]1^2+1+1 = 3 \equiv 1 \neq 0[/tex]

Hence it cannot be factored non-trivially. This means that

[tex]\mathbb{Z}_2[x]/(x^2+x+1) = \{a+bx | a,b \in \mathbb{Z}_2\}[/tex]

is a field.

This field has [itex]2^2=4[/itex] elements, namely

[tex] 0 + 0x = 0[/tex]
[tex] 1 + 0x = 1[/tex]
[tex] 0 + 1x = x[/tex]
[tex] 1 + 1x = 1+x[/tex]

For example,

[itex](1+x)(1+x) = x^2 + 2x + 1 \equiv (x+1) + 0x + 1 = x + 2 \equiv x[/itex]
 
Last edited:
  • #7
Does anyone know if I have done these correctly?
 

FAQ: Isomorphic Math Help: Proving Quotient Ring and Polynomial Irreducibility

1. How can I prove the quotient ring of two isomorphic rings?

To prove that two rings are isomorphic, you must show that there exists a bijective ring homomorphism between the two rings. This means that the mapping preserves the ring structure and is both injective and surjective.

2. What is the process for proving polynomial irreducibility?

To prove that a polynomial is irreducible, you must show that it cannot be factored into two non-constant polynomials with coefficients in the same field. This can be done using various techniques such as the rational root theorem, Eisenstein's criterion, or by showing that the polynomial has no roots in the field.

3. Can isomorphic rings have different polynomial irreducibility?

Yes, it is possible for two isomorphic rings to have different polynomial irreducibility. Isomorphism only guarantees that the two rings have the same underlying structure, but their elements and polynomials may still behave differently.

4. How do I know if two quotient rings are isomorphic?

To determine if two quotient rings are isomorphic, you can use the first isomorphism theorem which states that if there exists a surjective ring homomorphism from one ring to another, then the two quotient rings are isomorphic.

5. Are there any shortcuts or tricks for proving quotient ring isomorphism?

Unfortunately, there are no shortcuts or tricks for proving quotient ring isomorphism. The most reliable method is to explicitly construct a bijective ring homomorphism between the two rings, which may require some algebraic manipulations and calculations.

Similar threads

Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
2
Replies
69
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top