I Why is the p-adic order of zero considered infinite?

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter DaTario
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Zero
DaTario
Messages
1,092
Reaction score
46
TL;DR Summary
Hi all, I would like to know why the p-adic order of zero, i.e., the exponent of the highest power of p (prime) that divides 0, is infinite.

best wishes
Hi All,
The p-adic order of a positive integer n is the exponent of the highest power of the prime p that divides n. I would like to know why it is commonly assumed that the p-adic order of zero is infinite.
best wishes,
DaTario
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
The p-adic order and the p-adic absolute value are related by ##|x|_p=x^{-\operatorname{ord}(x)}##. Of course we want ##|0|_p=0##. The absolute value is the more important quantity.
 
Thank you, fresh 42. So it means that there is no connection with the purely "prime factorization of integers" meaning of the p-adic order. Is it correct?
 
Not really. Only the powers of a fixed prime are considered. However, it makes sense to define ##\operatorname{ord}(0)=\infty ## anyway: how often can we divide ##0## by ##p## until we get a remainder?
 
Thank you very much, you put a smile in my face with this very clear sentence. Thanks!
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.

Similar threads

Back
Top