Determine the generator of an ideal of ring of integers
$begingroup$
I am trying to find the generators of the ideal $(3)$ in the ring of integers of $mathbb{Q}[sqrt{-83}]$ the ring of integers is $mathbb{Z}left[frac{1+sqrt{-83}}{2}right]$ I evaluated the Minkowski constant and it is $2/pi sqrt{83} sim 5.8;$ then I checked the minimal polynomial of $x^2-x+84/2, $ which is reducible module $3,$ hence the ideal $(3)$ is generated by two elements, right? Did I miss something? I want to say the ring of integers is not a UFD.
ring-theory algebraic-number-theory ideal-class-group
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am trying to find the generators of the ideal $(3)$ in the ring of integers of $mathbb{Q}[sqrt{-83}]$ the ring of integers is $mathbb{Z}left[frac{1+sqrt{-83}}{2}right]$ I evaluated the Minkowski constant and it is $2/pi sqrt{83} sim 5.8;$ then I checked the minimal polynomial of $x^2-x+84/2, $ which is reducible module $3,$ hence the ideal $(3)$ is generated by two elements, right? Did I miss something? I want to say the ring of integers is not a UFD.
ring-theory algebraic-number-theory ideal-class-group
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am trying to find the generators of the ideal $(3)$ in the ring of integers of $mathbb{Q}[sqrt{-83}]$ the ring of integers is $mathbb{Z}left[frac{1+sqrt{-83}}{2}right]$ I evaluated the Minkowski constant and it is $2/pi sqrt{83} sim 5.8;$ then I checked the minimal polynomial of $x^2-x+84/2, $ which is reducible module $3,$ hence the ideal $(3)$ is generated by two elements, right? Did I miss something? I want to say the ring of integers is not a UFD.
ring-theory algebraic-number-theory ideal-class-group
$endgroup$
I am trying to find the generators of the ideal $(3)$ in the ring of integers of $mathbb{Q}[sqrt{-83}]$ the ring of integers is $mathbb{Z}left[frac{1+sqrt{-83}}{2}right]$ I evaluated the Minkowski constant and it is $2/pi sqrt{83} sim 5.8;$ then I checked the minimal polynomial of $x^2-x+84/2, $ which is reducible module $3,$ hence the ideal $(3)$ is generated by two elements, right? Did I miss something? I want to say the ring of integers is not a UFD.
ring-theory algebraic-number-theory ideal-class-group
ring-theory algebraic-number-theory ideal-class-group
edited 6 hours ago
J. W. Tanner
5,1351520
5,1351520
asked 7 hours ago
AmeryrAmeryr
768311
768311
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
You seem to have touched upon several different ideas here.
Generators of the ideal $(3)$. Usually, when you talk about the generators of $(3)$, you mean its generators as an abelian group.
Define $theta := tfrac 1 2 (1 + sqrt{-83})$. We know that the ring of integers $mathbb Z[theta]$ is generated by ${1, theta }$ as an abelian group, so $(3)$ is generated by ${3, 3theta }$ as an abelian group.
But having read the remainder of your question, it looks like this is not what you're after! What you're really after are the generators of the ideal class group for $mathbb Z[theta]$...
Minkowski constant. The fact that the Minkowski constant is $5.8$ implies that the ideal class group is generated by prime ideals that are factors of $(2)$ or $(3)$.
Dedekind's criterion. Dedekind's criterion is a way of factorising $(3)$ as a product of primes.
As you pointed out, we have the factorisation
$$ x^2 - x + frac {84}{2} equiv x(x-1) mod 3,$$
so Dedekind's criterion says that
$$ (3) = (3, theta)(3, theta - 1)$$
is the prime factorisation of $(3)$ in $mathbb Z[theta]$.
Whether $mathbb Z[theta]$ is a UFD. This is equivalent to asking whether the ideal class group is trivial, i.e. whether all ideals are principal.
Why don't we check whether $(3, theta)$ is principal? The answer must be "no". Note that $(3, theta)$ has norm $3$. If it was principal, then there would exist $x, y in mathbb Z$ such that $(3, theta) = (x + ytheta)$. But then
$$ 3 = N(3, theta) = N(x + ytheta) = (x + tfrac 1 2 y)^2 + 83(tfrac 1 2 y)^2,$$
which is impossible.
So $mathbb Z[theta]$ is not a principal ideal domain, and hence, is not a unique factorisation domain.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks that helpful, that what I was looking for
$endgroup$
– Ameryr
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The minimal polynomial of $alpha=frac{1+sqrt{-83}}{2}$ is $f = x^2 - x + 84/4 = x^2 - x + 21$. Modulo $3$ this factors as $$f equiv x^2 - x = x(x-1) pmod 3,$$
so by the Kummer-Dedekind theorem the ideal $(3)$ factors into primes in $mathbb{Z}bigg[frac{1+sqrt{-83}}{2}bigg]$ as $(3) = (3, alpha)(3, alpha-1)$.
The ideal $(3)$ is principal, generated by $3$. You can show that the prime factors are not principal, e.g. using the field norm:
If $(3,alpha) = (beta)$ then $N(beta)$ divides both $N(3) = 3^2$ and $N(alpha) = f(0) = 21 = 3cdot 7$, so $N(beta) = 3$.
If we write $beta = a+balpha$ then $$N(beta)=(a+balpha)(a+b(1-alpha)) = ldots = a^2+ab + 21b^2.$$
The equation $a^2+ab + 21b^2 = 3$ is an ellipse in the $(a,b)$-plane without integral points, so there is no such $beta$.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
How could you determine that the ellipse has no integral points?
$endgroup$
– Ameryr
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I plotted it (with a grid in the background). It's a very small ellipse, so there are very few candidates for integral points, and you can see that it misses them all.
$endgroup$
– Ricardo Buring
5 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3197383%2fdetermine-the-generator-of-an-ideal-of-ring-of-integers%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
You seem to have touched upon several different ideas here.
Generators of the ideal $(3)$. Usually, when you talk about the generators of $(3)$, you mean its generators as an abelian group.
Define $theta := tfrac 1 2 (1 + sqrt{-83})$. We know that the ring of integers $mathbb Z[theta]$ is generated by ${1, theta }$ as an abelian group, so $(3)$ is generated by ${3, 3theta }$ as an abelian group.
But having read the remainder of your question, it looks like this is not what you're after! What you're really after are the generators of the ideal class group for $mathbb Z[theta]$...
Minkowski constant. The fact that the Minkowski constant is $5.8$ implies that the ideal class group is generated by prime ideals that are factors of $(2)$ or $(3)$.
Dedekind's criterion. Dedekind's criterion is a way of factorising $(3)$ as a product of primes.
As you pointed out, we have the factorisation
$$ x^2 - x + frac {84}{2} equiv x(x-1) mod 3,$$
so Dedekind's criterion says that
$$ (3) = (3, theta)(3, theta - 1)$$
is the prime factorisation of $(3)$ in $mathbb Z[theta]$.
Whether $mathbb Z[theta]$ is a UFD. This is equivalent to asking whether the ideal class group is trivial, i.e. whether all ideals are principal.
Why don't we check whether $(3, theta)$ is principal? The answer must be "no". Note that $(3, theta)$ has norm $3$. If it was principal, then there would exist $x, y in mathbb Z$ such that $(3, theta) = (x + ytheta)$. But then
$$ 3 = N(3, theta) = N(x + ytheta) = (x + tfrac 1 2 y)^2 + 83(tfrac 1 2 y)^2,$$
which is impossible.
So $mathbb Z[theta]$ is not a principal ideal domain, and hence, is not a unique factorisation domain.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks that helpful, that what I was looking for
$endgroup$
– Ameryr
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You seem to have touched upon several different ideas here.
Generators of the ideal $(3)$. Usually, when you talk about the generators of $(3)$, you mean its generators as an abelian group.
Define $theta := tfrac 1 2 (1 + sqrt{-83})$. We know that the ring of integers $mathbb Z[theta]$ is generated by ${1, theta }$ as an abelian group, so $(3)$ is generated by ${3, 3theta }$ as an abelian group.
But having read the remainder of your question, it looks like this is not what you're after! What you're really after are the generators of the ideal class group for $mathbb Z[theta]$...
Minkowski constant. The fact that the Minkowski constant is $5.8$ implies that the ideal class group is generated by prime ideals that are factors of $(2)$ or $(3)$.
Dedekind's criterion. Dedekind's criterion is a way of factorising $(3)$ as a product of primes.
As you pointed out, we have the factorisation
$$ x^2 - x + frac {84}{2} equiv x(x-1) mod 3,$$
so Dedekind's criterion says that
$$ (3) = (3, theta)(3, theta - 1)$$
is the prime factorisation of $(3)$ in $mathbb Z[theta]$.
Whether $mathbb Z[theta]$ is a UFD. This is equivalent to asking whether the ideal class group is trivial, i.e. whether all ideals are principal.
Why don't we check whether $(3, theta)$ is principal? The answer must be "no". Note that $(3, theta)$ has norm $3$. If it was principal, then there would exist $x, y in mathbb Z$ such that $(3, theta) = (x + ytheta)$. But then
$$ 3 = N(3, theta) = N(x + ytheta) = (x + tfrac 1 2 y)^2 + 83(tfrac 1 2 y)^2,$$
which is impossible.
So $mathbb Z[theta]$ is not a principal ideal domain, and hence, is not a unique factorisation domain.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks that helpful, that what I was looking for
$endgroup$
– Ameryr
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You seem to have touched upon several different ideas here.
Generators of the ideal $(3)$. Usually, when you talk about the generators of $(3)$, you mean its generators as an abelian group.
Define $theta := tfrac 1 2 (1 + sqrt{-83})$. We know that the ring of integers $mathbb Z[theta]$ is generated by ${1, theta }$ as an abelian group, so $(3)$ is generated by ${3, 3theta }$ as an abelian group.
But having read the remainder of your question, it looks like this is not what you're after! What you're really after are the generators of the ideal class group for $mathbb Z[theta]$...
Minkowski constant. The fact that the Minkowski constant is $5.8$ implies that the ideal class group is generated by prime ideals that are factors of $(2)$ or $(3)$.
Dedekind's criterion. Dedekind's criterion is a way of factorising $(3)$ as a product of primes.
As you pointed out, we have the factorisation
$$ x^2 - x + frac {84}{2} equiv x(x-1) mod 3,$$
so Dedekind's criterion says that
$$ (3) = (3, theta)(3, theta - 1)$$
is the prime factorisation of $(3)$ in $mathbb Z[theta]$.
Whether $mathbb Z[theta]$ is a UFD. This is equivalent to asking whether the ideal class group is trivial, i.e. whether all ideals are principal.
Why don't we check whether $(3, theta)$ is principal? The answer must be "no". Note that $(3, theta)$ has norm $3$. If it was principal, then there would exist $x, y in mathbb Z$ such that $(3, theta) = (x + ytheta)$. But then
$$ 3 = N(3, theta) = N(x + ytheta) = (x + tfrac 1 2 y)^2 + 83(tfrac 1 2 y)^2,$$
which is impossible.
So $mathbb Z[theta]$ is not a principal ideal domain, and hence, is not a unique factorisation domain.
$endgroup$
You seem to have touched upon several different ideas here.
Generators of the ideal $(3)$. Usually, when you talk about the generators of $(3)$, you mean its generators as an abelian group.
Define $theta := tfrac 1 2 (1 + sqrt{-83})$. We know that the ring of integers $mathbb Z[theta]$ is generated by ${1, theta }$ as an abelian group, so $(3)$ is generated by ${3, 3theta }$ as an abelian group.
But having read the remainder of your question, it looks like this is not what you're after! What you're really after are the generators of the ideal class group for $mathbb Z[theta]$...
Minkowski constant. The fact that the Minkowski constant is $5.8$ implies that the ideal class group is generated by prime ideals that are factors of $(2)$ or $(3)$.
Dedekind's criterion. Dedekind's criterion is a way of factorising $(3)$ as a product of primes.
As you pointed out, we have the factorisation
$$ x^2 - x + frac {84}{2} equiv x(x-1) mod 3,$$
so Dedekind's criterion says that
$$ (3) = (3, theta)(3, theta - 1)$$
is the prime factorisation of $(3)$ in $mathbb Z[theta]$.
Whether $mathbb Z[theta]$ is a UFD. This is equivalent to asking whether the ideal class group is trivial, i.e. whether all ideals are principal.
Why don't we check whether $(3, theta)$ is principal? The answer must be "no". Note that $(3, theta)$ has norm $3$. If it was principal, then there would exist $x, y in mathbb Z$ such that $(3, theta) = (x + ytheta)$. But then
$$ 3 = N(3, theta) = N(x + ytheta) = (x + tfrac 1 2 y)^2 + 83(tfrac 1 2 y)^2,$$
which is impossible.
So $mathbb Z[theta]$ is not a principal ideal domain, and hence, is not a unique factorisation domain.
answered 6 hours ago
Kenny WongKenny Wong
20k21442
20k21442
$begingroup$
Thanks that helpful, that what I was looking for
$endgroup$
– Ameryr
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Thanks that helpful, that what I was looking for
$endgroup$
– Ameryr
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
Thanks that helpful, that what I was looking for
$endgroup$
– Ameryr
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
Thanks that helpful, that what I was looking for
$endgroup$
– Ameryr
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The minimal polynomial of $alpha=frac{1+sqrt{-83}}{2}$ is $f = x^2 - x + 84/4 = x^2 - x + 21$. Modulo $3$ this factors as $$f equiv x^2 - x = x(x-1) pmod 3,$$
so by the Kummer-Dedekind theorem the ideal $(3)$ factors into primes in $mathbb{Z}bigg[frac{1+sqrt{-83}}{2}bigg]$ as $(3) = (3, alpha)(3, alpha-1)$.
The ideal $(3)$ is principal, generated by $3$. You can show that the prime factors are not principal, e.g. using the field norm:
If $(3,alpha) = (beta)$ then $N(beta)$ divides both $N(3) = 3^2$ and $N(alpha) = f(0) = 21 = 3cdot 7$, so $N(beta) = 3$.
If we write $beta = a+balpha$ then $$N(beta)=(a+balpha)(a+b(1-alpha)) = ldots = a^2+ab + 21b^2.$$
The equation $a^2+ab + 21b^2 = 3$ is an ellipse in the $(a,b)$-plane without integral points, so there is no such $beta$.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
How could you determine that the ellipse has no integral points?
$endgroup$
– Ameryr
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I plotted it (with a grid in the background). It's a very small ellipse, so there are very few candidates for integral points, and you can see that it misses them all.
$endgroup$
– Ricardo Buring
5 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The minimal polynomial of $alpha=frac{1+sqrt{-83}}{2}$ is $f = x^2 - x + 84/4 = x^2 - x + 21$. Modulo $3$ this factors as $$f equiv x^2 - x = x(x-1) pmod 3,$$
so by the Kummer-Dedekind theorem the ideal $(3)$ factors into primes in $mathbb{Z}bigg[frac{1+sqrt{-83}}{2}bigg]$ as $(3) = (3, alpha)(3, alpha-1)$.
The ideal $(3)$ is principal, generated by $3$. You can show that the prime factors are not principal, e.g. using the field norm:
If $(3,alpha) = (beta)$ then $N(beta)$ divides both $N(3) = 3^2$ and $N(alpha) = f(0) = 21 = 3cdot 7$, so $N(beta) = 3$.
If we write $beta = a+balpha$ then $$N(beta)=(a+balpha)(a+b(1-alpha)) = ldots = a^2+ab + 21b^2.$$
The equation $a^2+ab + 21b^2 = 3$ is an ellipse in the $(a,b)$-plane without integral points, so there is no such $beta$.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
How could you determine that the ellipse has no integral points?
$endgroup$
– Ameryr
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I plotted it (with a grid in the background). It's a very small ellipse, so there are very few candidates for integral points, and you can see that it misses them all.
$endgroup$
– Ricardo Buring
5 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The minimal polynomial of $alpha=frac{1+sqrt{-83}}{2}$ is $f = x^2 - x + 84/4 = x^2 - x + 21$. Modulo $3$ this factors as $$f equiv x^2 - x = x(x-1) pmod 3,$$
so by the Kummer-Dedekind theorem the ideal $(3)$ factors into primes in $mathbb{Z}bigg[frac{1+sqrt{-83}}{2}bigg]$ as $(3) = (3, alpha)(3, alpha-1)$.
The ideal $(3)$ is principal, generated by $3$. You can show that the prime factors are not principal, e.g. using the field norm:
If $(3,alpha) = (beta)$ then $N(beta)$ divides both $N(3) = 3^2$ and $N(alpha) = f(0) = 21 = 3cdot 7$, so $N(beta) = 3$.
If we write $beta = a+balpha$ then $$N(beta)=(a+balpha)(a+b(1-alpha)) = ldots = a^2+ab + 21b^2.$$
The equation $a^2+ab + 21b^2 = 3$ is an ellipse in the $(a,b)$-plane without integral points, so there is no such $beta$.
$endgroup$
The minimal polynomial of $alpha=frac{1+sqrt{-83}}{2}$ is $f = x^2 - x + 84/4 = x^2 - x + 21$. Modulo $3$ this factors as $$f equiv x^2 - x = x(x-1) pmod 3,$$
so by the Kummer-Dedekind theorem the ideal $(3)$ factors into primes in $mathbb{Z}bigg[frac{1+sqrt{-83}}{2}bigg]$ as $(3) = (3, alpha)(3, alpha-1)$.
The ideal $(3)$ is principal, generated by $3$. You can show that the prime factors are not principal, e.g. using the field norm:
If $(3,alpha) = (beta)$ then $N(beta)$ divides both $N(3) = 3^2$ and $N(alpha) = f(0) = 21 = 3cdot 7$, so $N(beta) = 3$.
If we write $beta = a+balpha$ then $$N(beta)=(a+balpha)(a+b(1-alpha)) = ldots = a^2+ab + 21b^2.$$
The equation $a^2+ab + 21b^2 = 3$ is an ellipse in the $(a,b)$-plane without integral points, so there is no such $beta$.
answered 6 hours ago
Ricardo BuringRicardo Buring
1,98121437
1,98121437
1
$begingroup$
How could you determine that the ellipse has no integral points?
$endgroup$
– Ameryr
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I plotted it (with a grid in the background). It's a very small ellipse, so there are very few candidates for integral points, and you can see that it misses them all.
$endgroup$
– Ricardo Buring
5 hours ago
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
How could you determine that the ellipse has no integral points?
$endgroup$
– Ameryr
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I plotted it (with a grid in the background). It's a very small ellipse, so there are very few candidates for integral points, and you can see that it misses them all.
$endgroup$
– Ricardo Buring
5 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
How could you determine that the ellipse has no integral points?
$endgroup$
– Ameryr
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
How could you determine that the ellipse has no integral points?
$endgroup$
– Ameryr
5 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
I plotted it (with a grid in the background). It's a very small ellipse, so there are very few candidates for integral points, and you can see that it misses them all.
$endgroup$
– Ricardo Buring
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
I plotted it (with a grid in the background). It's a very small ellipse, so there are very few candidates for integral points, and you can see that it misses them all.
$endgroup$
– Ricardo Buring
5 hours ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3197383%2fdetermine-the-generator-of-an-ideal-of-ring-of-integers%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown