Unique Factorisation Domains/Fields

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Zoe-b
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concepts of unique factorization domains (UFDs) and fields, particularly focusing on the notion of irreducibility within these structures. Participants explore the implications of being a field compared to being a UFD, and they examine specific examples and rings to illustrate their points.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that in a field, all non-zero elements are units, which implies there are no irreducible elements.
  • One participant expresses confusion about irreducibility in the context of the ring R = union from n=1 to infinity of (Z [ 2^(1/n) ]), suggesting it has no irreducible elements.
  • Another participant questions whether the statement "all fields are UFDs" is correct, considering the concept of factorization is tied to irreducibility.
  • There is a discussion about whether the number 3 is irreducible in the ring being considered, with some participants agreeing on its irreducibility.
  • Concerns are raised about the lack of unique factorization for certain elements, such as the element 2, within the discussed ring.
  • One participant references a Wikipedia entry stating that "any field is trivially a UFD," which adds to the discussion but acknowledges that their example is not a field.
  • Another participant mentions that fractional powers of 2 do not have inverses in the ring, leading to questions about the equivalence of factorizations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between fields and UFDs, particularly regarding irreducibility and unique factorization. There is no consensus on whether the specific ring discussed is a UFD, as participants present conflicting arguments and examples.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity of defining irreducibility and unique factorization in various rings, with some examples lacking clear factorization properties. The discussion reflects the nuanced nature of these algebraic concepts and their interrelations.

Zoe-b
Messages
91
Reaction score
0
In my notes/online I have that for a set to be a field is a stronger condition than for a set to be a unique factorisation domain (obviously), but I'm confused about the concept of irreducibility in a field. For example in R\{0} there are no irreducible elements as far as I can tell? I'm trying to show whether a different ring is a UFD or not but again I find the concept of irreducibility difficult as here again the ring seems to have no irreducible elements.

Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
in any ring there are three classes of non zero elements: units, zero divisors, non unit non zero divisors. irreducibles are always, by definition, a subset of the non units. in a field, all non zero elements are units, hence there is no possibility of irreducibles.
 
Zoe-b said:
In my notes/online I have that for a set to be a field is a stronger condition than for a set to be a unique factorisation domain (obviously), but I'm confused about the concept of irreducibility in a field. For example in R\{0} there are no irreducible elements as far as I can tell? I'm trying to show whether a different ring is a UFD or not but again I find the concept of irreducibility difficult as here again the ring seems to have no irreducible elements.

Thanks in advance.

perhaps you should tells us which ring you are trying to prove is a UFD.
 
Ok that makes sense, so is the statement that all fields are UFDs correct? Or just nonsense because the concept of factorisation only makes sense with regards to irreducibles?

Let 2^(1/n) be the real positive nth root of 2. If we consider Z [ 2^(1/n) ] as the image of Z[X] under the evaluation map f(X) -> f(2^(1/n)), then let R= union from n=1 to infinity of (Z [ 2^(1/n) ]). I have shown already that R is a subring of the reals but as far as I can see it has no irreducible elements-
If a is a member of Z[2^(1/p)] for some natural number p, say a = g(2^(1/p)) for some polynomial g in Z[X]. Then we can always take out a factor of 2^(1/2p) to give

a = 2^(1/2p) * h(2^(1/2p))

where h is some polynomial in Z[X] (with the same integer coefficients as g but different powers). So a is reducible.

Am I on the completely wrong track?
 
Zoe-b said:
Ok that makes sense, so is the statement that all fields are UFDs correct? Or just nonsense because the concept of factorisation only makes sense with regards to irreducibles?

Let 2^(1/n) be the real positive nth root of 2. If we consider Z [ 2^(1/n) ] as the image of Z[X] under the evaluation map f(X) -> f(2^(1/n)), then let R= union from n=1 to infinity of (Z [ 2^(1/n) ]). I have shown already that R is a subring of the reals but as far as I can see it has no irreducible elements-
If a is a member of Z[2^(1/p)] for some natural number p, say a = g(2^(1/p)) for some polynomial g in Z[X]. Then we can always take out a factor of 2^(1/2p) to give

a = 2^(1/2p) * h(2^(1/2p))

where h is some polynomial in Z[X] (with the same integer coefficients as g but different powers). So a is reducible.

Am I on the completely wrong track?

Isn't the number 3 irreducible in this ring?
 
Ok I completely missed that the polynomial can have a constant term (being slow) so yes I think you're right, 3 is irreducible. But I still can't see whether or not it is a unique factorisation domain as any element where the polynomial has a zero constant term is reducible. For example there definitely is not a unique factorisation of the element 2 into irreducibles- infact there isn't any factorisation of 2 into irreducibles as far as I can see, nor (do I think!) is it a unit.

(I've just found a bit on wikipedia saying 'any field is trivially a UFD' which now makes sense to me but obviously my example is not a field).
 
Zoe-b said:
Ok I completely missed that the polynomial can have a constant term (being slow) so yes I think you're right, 3 is irreducible. But I still can't see whether or not it is a unique factorisation domain as any element where the polynomial has a zero constant term is reducible. For example there definitely is not a unique factorisation of the element 2 into irreducibles- infact there isn't any factorisation of 2 into irreducibles as far as I can see, nor (do I think!) is it a unit.

(I've just found a bit on wikipedia saying 'any field is trivially a UFD' which now makes sense to me but obviously my example is not a field).

None of the fractional powers of 2 have inverses in this ring since negative powers are excluded. So two factorizations will be in-equivalent. How about two factorizations of the square root of 2?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 84 ·
3
Replies
84
Views
11K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K