Isomorphic Polynomial Rings in F_5[x]

  • Thread starter Thread starter catcherintherye
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Polynomial Rings
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving that the polynomial rings F_5[x]/(x^2 + 2) and F_5[x]/(x^2 + 3) are isomorphic. The isomorphism is defined by the mapping U(x) = 2x, leading to the transformation of x^2 to 4x^2 + 2, which simplifies to -3 mod 5. The confusion arises from the calculations involving the terms in the isomorphism proof, particularly regarding the equivalence of 4bdx^2 and 3 mod 5. The correct interpretation requires recognizing that x^2 is equivalent to -3 mod 5.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of polynomial rings, specifically F_5[x]
  • Knowledge of isomorphisms in abstract algebra
  • Familiarity with modular arithmetic, particularly mod 5
  • Basic operations with polynomials and their transformations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of isomorphic polynomial rings in finite fields
  • Learn about the application of modular arithmetic in polynomial transformations
  • Explore the concept of ring homomorphisms and their proofs
  • Investigate the implications of polynomial equivalences in algebraic structures
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in abstract algebra, particularly those focusing on polynomial rings and isomorphisms, as well as educators teaching advanced algebra concepts.

catcherintherye
Messages
47
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I am required to prove that F_5[x]/(x^2 + 2) isomorphic to F_5[x]/(x^2 + 3)

now I have the solution in front of me so I more or less know what's going on, however there are some points of confusion...


...the solution states that x \rightarrow 2x will define the desired isomorphism. The next line asserts that

x^2 \rightarrow (2x)^2 + 2, 4x^2 + 2= -(x^2 -2) = -(x^2 +3)

x^2 = -2=3 ...?:confused:



..what is going on here surely x^2 \rightarrow 4x^2

since U(x^2) = U(x)U(x)= 2x2x = 4x^2 [\tex]<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> anyway this is not my only problem with the solution I have, it then goes on to assert that indeed the two rings are isomorphic and further that,<br /> <br /> U(a + bx) = a + 2bx is such an isomorphism<br /> <br /> <br /> The proof of this says<br /> <br /> U((a+bx)(c+dx)) = U(ac + adx bcx +bdx^2)= U(ac + 3bd +(ad + bc)x) = ac +3bd +2(ad+bc)x = *1<br /> <br /> U(a +bx)U(c+dx) = (a +2bx)(c+2dx) = ac + 2adx + 2bcx + 4bdx^2<br /> = ac+ 3bd + 2(ad + bc)x = *1<br /> <br /> fantastic! execept look at term 4 2 lines up, 4bdx^2 = 12bd=2bdmod 5 and not =3mod5...<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f615.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":confused:" title="Confused :confused:" data-smilie="5"data-shortname=":confused:" /> <br /> <br /> so what am i missing here?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't quite understand your first problem, but for your second problem you should set x^2=-3=2(mod 5).
 

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
8K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 56 ·
2
Replies
56
Views
11K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 77 ·
3
Replies
77
Views
12K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K