Struggling to understand a field theorm's corollary

  • Thread starter Thread starter PsychonautQQ
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Field
PsychonautQQ
Messages
781
Reaction score
10
Theorem: Let F be any field. If G is a finite subgroup of the multiplicative group F* of F, then G is cyclic. In particular, is F is finite, then F* is cyclic.

Corolarry 1: GF(p^n) = Z_p(u), where u is any primitive element for GF(p^n).

So <u> = GF(p^n)*, so |u| = GF(p^n) - 1.

I'm now trying to imagine what Z_p(u) would look like, maybe:

{a_0 + a_1*u + a_2*u^2 + ... a_(n-1)*u^n-1 | a_i are elements of Z_p, u^n = (0?)}

This would make sense because this field would have order n... but it would also mean that u^n = (0?) or something, when u^n should just equal u^n because |u| = GF(p^n) - 1 > n.

Anyone understand my dilemma? If anyone could drop some knowledge on this topic in general it'd be appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, let's look at an example. Take ##\mathbb{F}_4 = \{0,1,a,a+1\}##, where ##a^2 = a+1##. The primitive element is clearly ##a## and this has order ##3## because
a^2 = a+1~\text{and}~a^3 = a(a+1) = a^2 + a = a+1+a =1
We indeed have ##\mathbb{F}_4 = \{\alpha + \beta a~\vert~\alpha,\beta\in \mathbb{Z}_p\}##. But you see that this does not imply that ##a^2 = 1##. The issue is that ##\alpha + \beta a## and ##a^n## are very different notations which might coincide. In this situation, we have ##a^2 = a+1##. So if you look at the cyclic element ##a##, then we have a representation ##\{0,a,a^2,a^3\}## and when you look at it your way then we have ##\{0,1,a,1+a\}##. These are two very different notations.

I encourage you to try other examples to see this more clearly.
 
  • Like
Likes PsychonautQQ
why is a^2 = a + 1? As a field, all these elements need additive inverses do they not? what is the additive inverse for 1?
 
PsychonautQQ said:
why is a^2 = a + 1? As a field, all these elements need additive inverses do they not? what is the additive inverse for 1?

1 is its own additive inverse
 
  • Like
Likes PsychonautQQ
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
When decomposing a representation ##\rho## of a finite group ##G## into irreducible representations, we can find the number of times the representation contains a particular irrep ##\rho_0## through the character inner product $$ \langle \chi, \chi_0\rangle = \frac{1}{|G|} \sum_{g\in G} \chi(g) \chi_0(g)^*$$ where ##\chi## and ##\chi_0## are the characters of ##\rho## and ##\rho_0##, respectively. Since all group elements in the same conjugacy class have the same characters, this may be...

Similar threads

Back
Top