MHB Showing that Q(sqrt(p)) is in Q adjoined the pth root of unity

  • Thread starter Thread starter oblixps
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Root Unity
oblixps
Messages
35
Reaction score
0
i am having trouble showing that \mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{p*}) \subset \mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{p}) where p* = (-1)^{\frac{p-1}{2}}p. in other words, if p = 1 (mod 4) then p* = p and if p = 3 (mod 4) then p* = -p. i encountered this in the context of galois theory and i have no idea how to start. it seems that i need to know what \zeta_{p} looks like before i decide if \sqrt{p*} \in \mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{p}) but for arbitrary p that is hard to figure out. i also can't figure out why we have the 1 mod 4 and 3 mod 4. can someone give me some hints on this question?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
oblixps said:
i am having trouble showing that \mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{p*}) \subset \mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{p}) where p* = (-1)^{\frac{p-1}{2}}p. in other words, if p = 1 (mod 4) then p* = p and if p = 3 (mod 4) then p* = -p. i encountered this in the context of galois theory and i have no idea how to start. it seems that i need to know what \zeta_{p} looks like before i decide if \sqrt{p*} \in \mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{p}) but for arbitrary p that is hard to figure out. i also can't figure out why we have the 1 mod 4 and 3 mod 4. can someone give me some hints on this question?
Sorry for the long delay in responding – I didn't see this thread when it was first posted.

I believe that the key to this problem is to use the Vandermonde matrix formed by the $p$th roots of unity. If $\zeta = e^{2\pi i/p}$, let $V_p$ be the $p\times p$ matrix whose $(i,j)$-element is $\zeta^{\,ij}$ for $0\leqslant i,j\leqslant p-1$ (notice that the rows and columns are labelled from 0 to $p-1$ rather than from 1 to $p$). The first thing to check is that $V_pV_p^* = pI_p$, where the star denotes the hermitian transpose and $I_p$ is the $p\times p$ identity matrix. It follows that $|\det(V_p)| = p^{p/2}.$

Next, the matrix $V_p$ is unchanged if for $1\leqslant i\leqslant (p-1)/2$ we interchange row $i$ with row $p-i$ and then take the complex conjugate of each element of the resulting matrix. Interchanging two rows of a matrix changes the sign of its determinant, so if $(p-1)/2$ is even then the number of sign changes is even and so $\det(V_p) = \overline{\det(V_p)}$ (the bar denoting the complex conjugate). Therefore $\det(V_p)$ is real and it follows from the previous paragraph that $p^{-(p-1)/2}\det(V_p) = \pm\sqrt p$. But the left side of that equation is in $\mathbb{Q}(\zeta)$, so $\sqrt p \in\mathbb{Q}(\zeta)$ and hence $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt p)\subseteq \mathbb{Q}(\zeta)$.

If $(p-1)/2$ is odd, then a similar argument shows that $\det(V_p)$ is purely imaginary and therefore $p^{-(p-1)/2}\det(V_p) = \pm\sqrt{-p}$, from which $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt {-p})\subseteq \mathbb{Q}(\zeta)$.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top