Understand Irreducibility in Zp: What is Zp^x? Order of Elements in Zp

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Bachelier
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of irreducibility in the context of the group of invertible elements in modular arithmetic, specifically focusing on the polynomial equation x^2 + 1 in the field Zp. Participants explore the implications of the order of elements in Zp^x and the conditions under which roots exist for the equation.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the meaning of Zp^x and suggests it refers to the group of invertible elements of Zp under multiplication.
  • Another participant explains that in Z5, the element 2 has order 4, and discusses the relationship between the order of elements and the roots of the polynomial x^2 + 1.
  • A different participant describes the operations in Zp and clarifies that Zp - {0} forms a group under multiplication, allowing for the discussion of element orders.
  • This participant provides examples of elements in Z7 and their respective orders, concluding that Z7 has no elements of order 4, thus confirming the absence of solutions for x^2 + 1 = 0 in this case.
  • Another participant seeks to understand how to prove that for Zp to have a root of x^2 + 1, p must be a prime of the form 4k + 1.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the conditions under which roots exist for the polynomial x^2 + 1 in Zp, with some asserting that only primes of the form 4k + 1 allow for such roots, while others provide examples that illustrate the orders of elements in specific cases without reaching a consensus on a general proof.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes assumptions about the properties of primes and the structure of groups formed by non-zero elements in modular arithmetic, which may not be universally applicable without further clarification.

Bachelier
Messages
375
Reaction score
0
I came across this while doing some research. Can someone help me understand this concept.

x^2+1 has a root in Zp, is equivalent to having an element of order 4 in Zp^x

First, what is Zp^x,
Second are we considering the order under the multiplicative operation. So in this case, if I consider Z5, then no element has order 4 yet x= 2, and x =3 are both solution for x^2+1 !

thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Do you mean \mathbb{Z}_{p}^{\times}? This is just the group of invertible elements of \mathbb{Z}_{p} under multiplication. So in \mathbb{Z}_{5}^{\times}, for instance, 2 has order 4 (since 2^4 = 1 mod 5, but 2^2 = 4 ≠ 1 mod 5.

As for the other statement, if x^2 + 1 = 0, then x^2 = -1, so x^4 = 1 but x^2 does not, so x has order 4. Conversely, if x has order 4, then x^4 = 1, so x^2 = 1 or -1, but x^2 ≠ 1 since x does not have order 2, hence x^2 = -1 and is a root of x^2 + 1.
 
for a prime p, Zp has two operations we can consider.

addition mod p
multiplication mod p.

it just so happens that Zp - {0} (this is what is meant by (Zp)x. for a general n, it means only the elements in Zn, co-prime to n, but with a prime, this is every non-zero element) also forms a group, under multiplication mod p.

thus we can speak of order, just as we can with any group.

for example, in (Z7)x (everything is mod 7)

1 has order 1.
22 = 4
23 = 1, 2 has order 3.

32= 2
33= 6
34= 4
35= 5
36= 1, 3 has order 6 (3 is a "primitive root", a generator)

similarly, 4 has order 3, 5 has order 6 (another "primitive root"), and 6 has order 2.

(Z7)x has no elements of order 4, which means we don't have any solutions of x2+1 = 0, which we can verify:

12+1 = 2
22+1 = 5
32+1 = 3
42+1 = 3
52+1 = 5
62+1 = 2

in fact, for Zp to have a root of x2+1, p must be a prime of the form 4k+1, for some positive integer k (none of the primes of the form 4k+3 will work).
 
Both Thank you so much.

Deveno, How do I prove your last result. For Zp to have a root of x2+1, p must be a prime of the form 4k+1, for some positive integer k (none of the primes of the form 4k+3 will work).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
10K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K