What is the field with one element ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kamataat
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Element Field
Click For Summary
The concept of a "field with one element" is debated among mathematicians, primarily because traditional definitions of a field require distinct elements for 0 and 1. Some argue that if this condition is relaxed, a trivial field can be defined, which contains only one element. This trivial field satisfies many properties of a field, but its classification as a field depends on whether one accepts the equality of 0 and 1. The discussion highlights the complexities in defining mathematical structures and the implications of varying definitions. Ultimately, the existence of a field with one element remains a topic of theoretical interest in abstract algebra.
Kamataat
Messages
137
Reaction score
0
What is the "field with one element"?

From the definition of a field, it follows that such a thing does not exist. However a Google search reveals that apparently there is, or at least mathematicians think there ought to be, something that goes by that name. What is it? Is it called a "field" simply because of some analogies with fields even though it really isn't one?

The material (algebraic geometry) I've found online is over my head for the time being. I know basic abstract algebra, e.g. what a group, module, etc. is.

Also, the lecture notes I got from my uni mention the trivial field K = {a} with a*a=a, a+a=a and a=1=0.

Thanks in advance,
Kamataat
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This depends on your definition of field. My book says, "a field is a commutative ring with unity in which every nonzero element is a unit." But, my book defines a unity as a nonzero element of a ring that is a multiplicative identity. Therefore, there is no trivial field under this definition. If you simply throw out the condition that 1 \neq 0, you can, of course define the trivial field.
 
Kamataat said:
From the definition of a field, it follows that such a thing does not exist. However a Google search reveals that apparently there is, or at least mathematicians think there ought to be, something that goes by that name. What is it? Is it called a "field" simply because of some analogies with fields even though it really isn't one?

The material (algebraic geometry) I've found online is over my head for the time being. I know basic abstract algebra, e.g. what a group, module, etc. is.

Also, the lecture notes I got from my uni mention the trivial field K = {a} with a*a=a, a+a=a and a=1=0.

Thanks in advance,
Kamataat

What Moo of Doom said is correct: most definitions of "field" require that there exist distinct 0 and 1. Dropping that requirement, then there can exist a "field" having only one element. It would have to be, then exactly what you give a "the trivial field".
 
There is a ring with one element. It is commutative, has no zero divisors, has no proper ideals, etc. Whether you call this a field or not depends on whether you allow fields with 1=0, since it trivially satisfies every other property. And if you do, then for any element a in such a field a=a*1=a*0=0, so the field has exactly one element (which is why the condition that 1 and 0 be distinct is usually added).
 
I am studying the mathematical formalism behind non-commutative geometry approach to quantum gravity. I was reading about Hopf algebras and their Drinfeld twist with a specific example of the Moyal-Weyl twist defined as F=exp(-iλ/2θ^(μν)∂_μ⊗∂_ν) where λ is a constant parametar and θ antisymmetric constant tensor. {∂_μ} is the basis of the tangent vector space over the underlying spacetime Now, from my understanding the enveloping algebra which appears in the definition of the Hopf algebra...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
878
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
Replies
28
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K