Prime Subfiellds - Lovett, Proposition 7.1.3 ....

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Math Amateur
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Prime
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around Proposition 7.1.3 from Stephen Lovett's "Abstract Algebra: Structures and Applications," specifically focusing on the properties of prime subfields and their equivalence to the field of integers modulo a prime, ##\mathbb{Z}/p\mathbb{Z}##. Participants seek clarification on the proof and implications of this proposition, particularly regarding the existence of certain elements and their operations within the field.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Peter questions how a subfield containing elements such as ##0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, \ldots, (p-1)## can be equal to ##\mathbb{Z}/p\mathbb{Z}## given that it also includes divisions like ##1/2## and ##3/5##.
  • Andrew explains that a field's characteristic must be either zero or a prime number to avoid divisors of zero, and notes that ##\mathbb{Z}_p## is a field for prime ##p##, which allows for the fractions to be interpreted as modular integers.
  • Peter asks for clarification on how to demonstrate the specific modular equivalences of ##1/2 = 3## in ##\mathbb{Z}_5## and ##3/5 = 2## in ##\mathbb{Z}_7##.
  • Andrew provides a technical explanation of the modular arithmetic involved in these equivalences, using multiplication and modular reduction to illustrate the relationships.
  • Peter expresses gratitude for Andrew's assistance and seeks further understanding.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants appear to engage in a constructive dialogue, with some agreement on the properties of fields and modular arithmetic, but the initial question raised by Peter indicates a lack of consensus on the implications of the proposition and the nature of the elements within the subfield.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the need for clarity on the definitions and properties of fields, particularly in relation to modular arithmetic and the characteristics of prime fields. There are unresolved aspects regarding the proof of Proposition 7.1.3 and the specific operations within the field.

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading Abstract Algebra: Structures and Applications" by Stephen Lovett ...

I am currently focused on Chapter 7: Field Extensions ... ...

I need help with the proof of, or at least some remarks concerning, Proposition 7.1.3 ...Proposition 7.1.3 plus some introductory remarks (proof?) reads as follows:
?temp_hash=02da1cdefd37f0c81dd87c9714486c3e.png


In the above text from Lovett we read the following:"... ... However, the multiplication on these elements as defined by distributivity gives this set of elements the structure of ##\mathbb{F}_p = \mathbb{Z} / p \mathbb{Z}##. ... ... " ... ... BUT ... the subfield contains elements ##0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, \ ... \ ... \ (p -1)##... and being a field, it contains divisions of these elements such as ##1/2, 3/5 \ ... \ ... \ ...##... so how can this subfield be equal to ##\mathbb{Z} / p \mathbb{Z}## ... ... ?
Hope someone can help ...

Peter
 

Attachments

  • Lovett - Proposition 7.1.3 - Prime Subfield ... ....png
    Lovett - Proposition 7.1.3 - Prime Subfield ... ....png
    40.2 KB · Views: 691
Physics news on Phys.org
The missing piece is that a field's characteristic must be either zero or a prime number, otherwise there will be divisors of zero (can you see why?), which would disqualify ##F## from being a field. We then use the theorem that ##\mathbb Z_p## is a field for ##p## prime, so that the fractions you listed are all modular integers in ##\mathbb Z_p##. For instance ##1/2=3## in ##\mathbb Z_5## and ##3/5=2## in ##\mathbb Z_7##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Math Amateur
Thanks for the help Andrew ...

Just reflecting on what you have said ...

However, can you give me an indication of how exactly we can demonstrate that ##1/2 = 3## in ##\mathbb{Z}_5## and ##3/5 = 2## in ##\mathbb{Z}_7## ...

Then I will get an idea of what is going on ...

Peter
 
For the first one, ##3\times 2=6 = 5+1##, so that ##3_5\times 2_5=1_5## where the 5 subscript denotes 'mod 5' (technically speaking, ##k_p## denotes ##k+p\mathbb Z##).

Similarly, ##2\times 5=10=7+3##, so that ##2_7\times 5_7=3_7##.

A good way of thinking of it is as a clock, with the numbers 0 to p-1 marked around the outside. and a single hand. Asking 'what is 1 / 2 mod 5' is the same as asking what rotation (past how many marked numbers) must I perform 2 times, starting at 0, to end up at 1?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Math Amateur
Thanks Andrew ... really appreciate your help ..

Peter
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K