Quotient Field of the Positive Rationals

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the exploration of the quotient field of the positive rationals, particularly through the lens of algebraic structures such as integral domains and equivalence relations. Participants are investigating the implications of defining binary operations and mappings related to prime factorization and their potential connections to p-adic fields and logarithmic structures.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes a mapping from the positive rationals to sequences of exponents in their prime factorization, proposing that this mapping is an isomorphism and leads to the definition of a binary operation on positive rationals.
  • Another participant suggests that the relation defined on pairs of positive rationals is an equivalence relation and expresses excitement about potentially defining a new binary relation that could relate to p-adic fields or logarithmic structures.
  • A later reply discusses standard operations for the field of fractions and proposes that the field of fractions could be related to rational functions with integer coefficients, raising questions about the implications for the structure of the positive rationals.
  • One participant expresses curiosity about the completeness of the new extension of positive rationals and its implications for treating polynomial rings as metric spaces.
  • Another participant notes that the extension can be generalized to any permutation of primes, suggesting that this could lead to different orderings and structures, reinforcing the connection to p-adic numbers.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various ideas and hypotheses, but there is no consensus on the nature of the field of fractions or the completeness of the new extension of positive rationals. Multiple competing views and explorations remain present throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention unresolved aspects regarding the definitions of binary operations, the completeness of the new extension, and the implications of different orderings based on prime selections. These points highlight the complexity and conditionality of the arguments presented.

Kindayr
Messages
159
Reaction score
0
So earlier this year I came here to discuss about having fun with groups, rings and isomorphisms and such. I fell upon the idea of finding an isomorphism of the positive rationals to the sequence of the exponents found in their prime factorization. I didn't know what much to do with it since I hadn't taken any modern algebra courses at the time and had no comfort in actually defining anything or proving anything to be true.

When I was playing around with it, I defined a binary operation that basically, now that I've refined it, takes any two positive rationals, takes the polynomials associated with them in Z[X], multiply those polynomials, then take the inverse of my original map back to the positive rationals.

That is, I defined a map \phi :\mathbb{Q}^{+}\to\mathbb{Z}[X] such that if a\in\mathbb{Q}^{+}, then there exists k\in\mathbb{N} and e_{0},e_{1},\dots ,e_{k}\in\mathbb{Z} such that a=\prod^{k}_{i=0} p_{i}^{e_{i}} and thus \phi (a)=(e_{0},e_{1},\dots,e_{k},0,0,\dots). Its easy to show that this an isomorphism and that \phi(ab)=\phi(a) +\phi(b).

I then defined a binary operation \oplus :\mathbb{Q}^{+}\times\mathbb{Q}^{+}\to \mathbb{Q}^{+} such that a\oplus b=\phi^{-1} [\phi(a) \cdot \phi(b)].

It is then easy to show that (\mathbb{Q}^{+},\cdot,\oplus,1,2) is an integral domain and that \phi is an isomorphism of integral domains.

I was wondering now if I could find the field of fractions for the integral domain I just defined. What field would I get out of it?

Anyone have an answer?

Its a little late to work it out but I'll see where I get and post it up here :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Like I can easily show that the relation ~ over \mathbb{Q}^{+}\times\mathbb{Q}^{+} defined such that for all a,b,c,d\in\mathbb{Q}^{+}, we have (a,b)~(c,d) iff a\oplus d=b\oplus c is an equivalence relation.

Now comes the hard part of defining some sort of binary relation *:(\mathbb{Q}^{+}\times\mathbb{Q}^{+})\times (\mathbb{Q}^{+}\times\mathbb{Q}^{+})\to\mathbb{Q}^{+}\times\mathbb{Q}^{+}.

I feel like I'm on to something.

Could I be making some sort of \mathbb{Q}_{p_{1},p_{2},\dots} extension? As if the p_{1},p_{2},\dots-adic field? Could it even be that I'm defining some sort of field that has to do with logarithms?

I'm so happy, excited and confused all at once.
 
Anyone have anything?
 
Kindayr said:
Like I can easily show that the relation ~ over \mathbb{Q}^{+}\times\mathbb{Q}^{+} defined such that for all a,b,c,d\in\mathbb{Q}^{+}, we have (a,b)~(c,d) iff a\oplus d=b\oplus c is an equivalence relation.

Now comes the hard part of defining some sort of binary relation *:(\mathbb{Q}^{+}\times\mathbb{Q}^{+})\times (\mathbb{Q}^{+}\times\mathbb{Q}^{+})\to\mathbb{Q}^{+}\times\mathbb{Q}^{+}.

I feel like I'm on to something.

Could I be making some sort of \mathbb{Q}_{p_{1},p_{2},\dots} extension? As if the p_{1},p_{2},\dots-adic field? Could it even be that I'm defining some sort of field that has to do with logarithms?

I'm so happy, excited and confused all at once.

just use the standard operations defined for the field of fractions:

[(a,b)] * [(c,d)] = [((ad)(bc), b⊕d)] for the additive operation, and

[(a,b)] ● [(c,d)] = [(a⊕c, b⊕d)], for the multiplicative operation.

you'll want to exclude {1} from being the second element in your positive rational pairs, and you'll want to be able to show that the mapping Q+ ---> (Q+ x Q+\{1}) given by q---> [(q,2)] is an isomorphism.

some random thoughts that occurred to me: your field of fractions should be Z(x), the rational functions with integer coefficients, which i think is the same as Q(x). which leads to an interesting question: Q(x) contains Q[x] as a sub-ring, what extension of Q+ does this correspond to?

it appears that your correspondence leads to a total order on Z[x]. is this order preserved when we go to Z(x)? what do we get when we consider the cauchy completion of Q+ (is there a corresponding convergent sequence of polynomials in Z[x]? does this lead to Z[[x]] (integral power series))?
 
I was wondering about order and completion as well in Z[X]. Another thing I was asking is if this new extension of Q+ is complete itself. Which would be interesting considering the fact that this new set is countable.

This also has me testing a few things with respect to treating Z[X] as a metric space that I'll type up when i have more time.
 
and also, you can generalize this extension of Q+ to any permutation of primes. Like if you choose the first coefficient of your polynomial to correspond to the power of some other prime than 2, then you get a whole different ordering, whole different everything. Thats why I feel it has something to do with p-adics.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K