Proving each nonzero element of a subfield of C has an inverse

  • Thread starter Thread starter MissMoneypenny
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Element Inverse
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves the subfield S={p+qα+rα2 : p, q, r ∈ ℚ}, where α=∛2, and requires proving that each nonzero element of S has a multiplicative inverse in S.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the structure of S and the implications of its elements being linear combinations of 1, α, and α2. There are attempts to establish a system of equations for finding inverses and questions about the validity of the problem statement regarding the properties of subfields.

Discussion Status

Some participants are exploring the implications of the problem statement and whether it accurately reflects the requirements for proving S is a subfield. Others are attempting to clarify how to show that sums of elements with known inverses also have inverses, while expressing uncertainty about their approaches.

Contextual Notes

There is a recognition that the original problem statement may have been misleading, as it suggests proving a property that is inherently true for subfields. Participants are also discussing how to frame the problem more clearly to focus on the existence of multiplicative inverses.

MissMoneypenny
Messages
17
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Let S={p+qα+rα2 : p, q, r \in \mathbb{Q}}, where α=\sqrt[3]{2}. Then S is a subfield of \mathbb{C}. Prove that each nonzero element of S has a multiplicative inverse in S.

The Attempt at a Solution



Let p, q, r\in\mathbb{Q} such that not all of p, q, r are zero. If each nonzero element of S has a multiplicative inverse in S, then there are rational numbers a, b, c so that

(p+qα+rα2)(a+bα+cα2)=1

Expanding and using the fact that α3=2 and α4=2α, we get:

(pa+2qc+2rb)+α(pb+qa+2rc)+α2(pc+qb+ra)=1

Since 1, α, and α2 are linearly independent we may equate coefficients to give a system of equations:

pa+2qc+2rb=1
pb+qa+2rc=0
pc+qb+ra=0

Now to finish the problem I want to show that this system always has a solution in \mathbb{Q}. I tried using Cramer's rule (i.e. showing the determinant of the matrix whose entries are the coefficients of p, q, r is equal to zero only if p=q=r=0), but I had no luck and it just turned into a mess. Likewise, back substitution was a mess. Can anyone give me a hand on how to complete this problem?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
MissMoneypenny said:

Homework Statement



Let S={p+qα+rα2 : p, q, r \in \mathbb{Q}}, where α=\sqrt[3]{2}. Then S is a subfield of \mathbb{C}. Prove that each nonzero element of S has a multiplicative inverse in S.

The Attempt at a Solution



Let p, q, r\in\mathbb{Q} such that not all of p, q, r are zero. If each nonzero element of S has a multiplicative inverse in S, then there are rational numbers a, b, c so that

(p+qα+rα2)(a+bα+cα2)=1

Expanding and using the fact that α3=2 and α4=2α, we get:

(pa+2qc+2rb)+α(pb+qa+2rc)+α2(pc+qb+ra)=1

Since 1, α, and α2 are linearly independent we may equate coefficients to give a system of equations:

pa+2qc+2rb=1
pb+qa+2rc=0
pc+qb+ra=0

Now to finish the problem I want to show that this system always has a solution in \mathbb{Q}. I tried using Cramer's rule (i.e. showing the determinant of the matrix whose entries are the coefficients of p, q, r is equal to zero only if p=q=r=0), but I had no luck and it just turned into a mess. Likewise, back substitution was a mess. Can anyone give me a hand on how to complete this problem?

Thanks!

If ##x, y \in S## have multiplicative inverses in ##S## and if ##x + y \neq 0##, can you prove that ##x+y## has a multiplicative inverse in ##S##? Can you prove that ##1, \alpha, \alpha^2## all have multiplicative inverses in ##S##?
 
Thanks for the quick response! I think I see what you're getting at. If I can prove what you wrote, then since each element of S is a linear combination of 1, α, and α2 whose coefficients are in \mathbb{Q}, it follows that each element of S has an inverse in S. Unfortunately I really am not sure how to show that if x, y, x^{-1}, y^{-1} \in S with x \ne y, then (x+y)^{-1} \in S. I tried to solve the equation (x+y)(ax^{-1}+bx^{-1})=1 for a and b, but that didn't get me anywhere, and I'm not sure what else to try. Is it possible for you to give me a small hint to get me going in the right direction?

Thanks again.
 
Was that really the original statement of the problem? Saying "S is a subfield of mathbb{C}. Prove that each nonzero element of S has a multiplicative inverse in S" seems very strange! A subfield is, by definition, a field so each non-zero element must have a multiplicative inverse. It would make more sense to first define S then ask to show that every nonzero element has a multiplicative inverse, as part of proving that S is a subfield.
 
You're correct, what I wrote is a strange problem statement. It was my fault. The full problem was to show S is a subfield of C. However, I knew how to prove all of the other field axioms hold for S, so I changed the problem statement. As you correctly pointed out, I didn't change it very well. Would it be better if I wrote "confirm that each nonzero element of S has an identity"? Or should I just have written up the actual problem statement but mentioned I only need help proving the existence of multiplicative inverses?
 
MissMoneypenny said:
Thanks for the quick response! I think I see what you're getting at. If I can prove what you wrote, then since each element of S is a linear combination of 1, α, and α2 whose coefficients are in \mathbb{Q}, it follows that each element of S has an inverse in S. Unfortunately I really am not sure how to show that if x, y, x^{-1}, y^{-1} \in S with x \ne y, then (x+y)^{-1} \in S. I tried to solve the equation (x+y)(ax^{-1}+bx^{-1})=1 for a and b, but that didn't get me anywhere, and I'm not sure what else to try. Is it possible for you to give me a small hint to get me going in the right direction?

Thanks again.

Many of these issues are dealt with in
http://math.stackexchange.com/quest...proof-that-the-algebraic-numbers-form-a-field

If you Google 'algebraic numbers' or 'algebraic number fields' you will encounter loads of material on your topic.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K