Is There a Quadratic Equation for Polynomials in Z_n?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion addresses the existence of quadratic equations for polynomials in Z_n, specifically focusing on the polynomial x^2 + x + 1 in Z_2. It concludes that while traditional quadratic formulas yield complex roots, working within the field extension Z_2(c) allows for a different approach to finding solutions. The discussion emphasizes that in Z_2, the element c behaves differently than complex numbers, and that the polynomial ring Z_2[c] can be used to explore roots effectively. Ultimately, it highlights the importance of understanding field extensions to work with polynomial solutions in modular arithmetic.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of polynomial rings, specifically Z_n
  • Knowledge of field extensions and their properties
  • Familiarity with modular arithmetic and its implications
  • Basic concepts of abstract algebra, particularly quadratic equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore the properties of polynomial rings over finite fields
  • Study field extensions in depth, particularly in Z_n
  • Learn about the structure and applications of quotient rings
  • Investigate the implications of roots of unity in modular arithmetic
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in abstract algebra, mathematicians exploring polynomial equations in modular systems, and educators teaching concepts related to field theory and polynomial roots.

lol_nl
Messages
40
Reaction score
0
Working through A Book of Abstract Algebra, I encountered several exercises on roots of polynomials in Z_{n} I was just wondering whether there exists something like a quadratic equation for polynomials of degree 2. If the solutions of the usual quadratic formula happen to be integers, can one simply take these modulo n to find solutions of the quadratic in Z_{n}? What if they are not integers? Clearly a field extension is needed to find solutions, but how does this precisely work?

As an example, consider the equation x^{2} + x + 1 = 0 in Z_{2}. The quadratic equation gives x = -\frac{1}{2} \pm \frac{1}{2} i. Suppose you name the positive root as c. Then Z_{2}(c) = {0,1,c,1+c} is the field extension. Now can one work with c in the same way as with x = -\frac{1}{2} \pm \frac{1}{2} i? Clearly, you easily get contradictions like 1 = -1 = 2c-1 = 3i = i and so on.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Maybe it's a good first step to identify a good field extensions that allows you to have roots.

If we have the polynomial X^2+X+1 in \mathbb{Z}_2, then we can look at the polynomial ring \mathbb{Z}_2[c].
Now, we let F=\mathbb{Z}_2[c]/(c^2+c+1) the quotient of the polynomial ring with the ideal (X^2+X+1). This is again a field, as is easily checked.

The elements of F are \{0,1,c,c+1\} as you suspected.
Now, an important feature of this field is that c^2=-c-1. This allows you to multiply all numbers in the field.

Now, you can not work with c as you can work with -\frac{1}{2}\pm \frac{1}{2}i. One reason for that is already that \frac{1}{2} doesn't make any sense in \mathbb{Z}_2

If you want to work with an analogous things as i then you will have to look for solutions to the equation X^2+1=0. Clearly, X=1 is the only solution to this equation. So in this case, there is no need to make an element i such that i^2=-1. We already have such an element. That is: i=1. So if you work in F or in \mathbb{Z}_2, then you can safely say i=1. Even better: you don't need to talk about i.
 
I am studying the mathematical formalism behind non-commutative geometry approach to quantum gravity. I was reading about Hopf algebras and their Drinfeld twist with a specific example of the Moyal-Weyl twist defined as F=exp(-iλ/2θ^(μν)∂_μ⊗∂_ν) where λ is a constant parametar and θ antisymmetric constant tensor. {∂_μ} is the basis of the tangent vector space over the underlying spacetime Now, from my understanding the enveloping algebra which appears in the definition of the Hopf algebra...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
48
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
7K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
9K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K