What is the extension of the Unique Factorization Theorem to Gaussian Integers?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter huba
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Factorization Theorem
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the extension of the Unique Factorization Theorem (UFT) to Gaussian Integers (GI), exploring the uniqueness of prime factorization in this context and comparing it to the factorization of integers. Participants express confusion and differing interpretations regarding the applicability of UFT to Gaussian integers and the existence of distinct factorizations.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses uncertainty about the uniqueness of prime factorization in Gaussian integers, questioning if similar issues arise in the integer case.
  • Another participant asserts that the Unique Factorization Theorem does not hold for Gaussian integers, suggesting that distinct factorizations exist.
  • A reference is made to W.J. LeVeque's work, which supports the claim of distinct factorizations in Gaussian integers.
  • One participant argues that nonzero rational integers have unique factorization up to order and units, and claims that Gaussian integers also have unique factorization, although they can factor further than rational integers.
  • There is a suggestion that the confusion may stem from mixing up Gaussian integers with other number systems, such as Z[sqrt(-5)], which do not have unique factorization.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus; there are competing views regarding the validity of the Unique Factorization Theorem for Gaussian integers, with some asserting it holds and others claiming it does not.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific examples and theorems, but there are unresolved assumptions regarding the definitions and properties of unique factorization in different number systems.

huba
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
I am not sure I fully understand the extension of the Unique Factorization Theorem (UFT) to Gaussian Integers (GI), by saying that the representation of a GI as a product of primes is unique except for the order of factors and the presence of units.

Is there a similar problem when the UFT is extended to integers?
For example, -6 can be represented as -2*3 or 2*-3 or -1*2*3, or -1*-2*-3.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I am very confused by your question! The "Unique Factorization Theorem" extended to Gaussian integers? The "Unique Factorization Theorem" does not hold for the Gaussian integers: there exist distinct factorizations of some Gaussian integers. I can't think of an example offhand but I don't think it is terribly difficult.
 
I was reading W.J. LeVeque's Elementary Theory of Numbers. Theorem 6-8 says what I said.
 
A nonzero (rational) integer has a unique factorization up to order and the presence of units (1 and -1).

Gaussian integers similarly have unique factorization up to order and units (1, i, -1, -i). Gaussian integers factor 'further' then rational integers, though: 2 is a prime rational integer, but 2 = (1 + i)(1 - i) in the Gaussian integers.

Most Z[sqrt(n)] do not have unique factorization, though.
 
HallsofIvy said:
I am very confused by your question! The "Unique Factorization Theorem" extended to Gaussian integers? The "Unique Factorization Theorem" does not hold for the Gaussian integers: there exist distinct factorizations of some Gaussian integers. I can't think of an example offhand but I don't think it is terribly difficult.

Eh?? The Gaussian integers are a Euclidean domain, so of course they're a ufd
 
LukeD said:
Eh??

Hush, Halls was thinking of [itex]\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{-5}][/itex].
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
7K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
7K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K