How can we consider $Bbb Z_3[x]/ langle x^2+x+2rangle$ as splitting field for $x^2+x+2$ over $Bbb Z_3$
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
My book introduce two kind of splitting field. One of them is $Bbb Z_3(i)={a+bi : a, b in Bbb Z_3}$. The other is $Bbb Z_3[x]/langle x^2+x+2rangle$. But, I am confused how the latter case could be splitting field. As follows my book, since $F=Bbb Z_3[x]/langle x^2+x+2rangle$ is field and by fundamental Theorem of Field, $beta = x+langle x^2+x+1rangle$ is one root of $f(x)=x^2+x+1$ in $F$. So by factor theorem, $f(x)$ splits in $F$. And
because $F$ is two-dimensional vector space over $Bbb Z_3$, we know that $F$ is also a splitting field of $f(x)$ over $Bbb Z_3$
My curious part is here.
First, how can the fact that $F$ is 2-dim vector space induce consequent conclusion.
Second, If the statement is true, by definition of splitting field $F=Bbb Z_3(alpha, beta)$ where $alpha$ is the other root of $f(x)$ in $F$. But rigorously the equality is not true because each side of elements are different. For example, right side contain 2, but 2 is not contained in left side. I guess just identifying $a$ in $Bbb Z_3$ with $a+langle x^2+x+1rangle$ may induce the equality. But even if it is the case, components of two sets are different! So pleas help me with more additional explanation. Thanks!
extension-field
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
My book introduce two kind of splitting field. One of them is $Bbb Z_3(i)={a+bi : a, b in Bbb Z_3}$. The other is $Bbb Z_3[x]/langle x^2+x+2rangle$. But, I am confused how the latter case could be splitting field. As follows my book, since $F=Bbb Z_3[x]/langle x^2+x+2rangle$ is field and by fundamental Theorem of Field, $beta = x+langle x^2+x+1rangle$ is one root of $f(x)=x^2+x+1$ in $F$. So by factor theorem, $f(x)$ splits in $F$. And
because $F$ is two-dimensional vector space over $Bbb Z_3$, we know that $F$ is also a splitting field of $f(x)$ over $Bbb Z_3$
My curious part is here.
First, how can the fact that $F$ is 2-dim vector space induce consequent conclusion.
Second, If the statement is true, by definition of splitting field $F=Bbb Z_3(alpha, beta)$ where $alpha$ is the other root of $f(x)$ in $F$. But rigorously the equality is not true because each side of elements are different. For example, right side contain 2, but 2 is not contained in left side. I guess just identifying $a$ in $Bbb Z_3$ with $a+langle x^2+x+1rangle$ may induce the equality. But even if it is the case, components of two sets are different! So pleas help me with more additional explanation. Thanks!
extension-field
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
My book introduce two kind of splitting field. One of them is $Bbb Z_3(i)={a+bi : a, b in Bbb Z_3}$. The other is $Bbb Z_3[x]/langle x^2+x+2rangle$. But, I am confused how the latter case could be splitting field. As follows my book, since $F=Bbb Z_3[x]/langle x^2+x+2rangle$ is field and by fundamental Theorem of Field, $beta = x+langle x^2+x+1rangle$ is one root of $f(x)=x^2+x+1$ in $F$. So by factor theorem, $f(x)$ splits in $F$. And
because $F$ is two-dimensional vector space over $Bbb Z_3$, we know that $F$ is also a splitting field of $f(x)$ over $Bbb Z_3$
My curious part is here.
First, how can the fact that $F$ is 2-dim vector space induce consequent conclusion.
Second, If the statement is true, by definition of splitting field $F=Bbb Z_3(alpha, beta)$ where $alpha$ is the other root of $f(x)$ in $F$. But rigorously the equality is not true because each side of elements are different. For example, right side contain 2, but 2 is not contained in left side. I guess just identifying $a$ in $Bbb Z_3$ with $a+langle x^2+x+1rangle$ may induce the equality. But even if it is the case, components of two sets are different! So pleas help me with more additional explanation. Thanks!
extension-field
My book introduce two kind of splitting field. One of them is $Bbb Z_3(i)={a+bi : a, b in Bbb Z_3}$. The other is $Bbb Z_3[x]/langle x^2+x+2rangle$. But, I am confused how the latter case could be splitting field. As follows my book, since $F=Bbb Z_3[x]/langle x^2+x+2rangle$ is field and by fundamental Theorem of Field, $beta = x+langle x^2+x+1rangle$ is one root of $f(x)=x^2+x+1$ in $F$. So by factor theorem, $f(x)$ splits in $F$. And
because $F$ is two-dimensional vector space over $Bbb Z_3$, we know that $F$ is also a splitting field of $f(x)$ over $Bbb Z_3$
My curious part is here.
First, how can the fact that $F$ is 2-dim vector space induce consequent conclusion.
Second, If the statement is true, by definition of splitting field $F=Bbb Z_3(alpha, beta)$ where $alpha$ is the other root of $f(x)$ in $F$. But rigorously the equality is not true because each side of elements are different. For example, right side contain 2, but 2 is not contained in left side. I guess just identifying $a$ in $Bbb Z_3$ with $a+langle x^2+x+1rangle$ may induce the equality. But even if it is the case, components of two sets are different! So pleas help me with more additional explanation. Thanks!
extension-field
extension-field
edited Nov 20 at 7:50
Teddy38
2,0512520
2,0512520
asked Nov 20 at 7:23
fivestar
35519
35519
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
Firstly note that $x^2+x+2$ is an irreducible polynomial over $Bbb{Z}_3$ because it has no linear factors (since it is degree $2$, so enough to check linear factors). So we consider the quotient ring
$$Bbb{F}_9=Bbb{Z}_3[x]/langle f(x) rangle=Bbb{Z}_3[x]/langle x^2+x+2 rangle={ax+b , | , a,b in Bbb{Z}_3 text{ and } x^2+x+2=0}.$$
One can use the irreducibility of $f(x)$ (hence the ideal $langle f(x) rangle$ is maximal etc.) to claim that $Bbb{F}_9$ is indeed a field.
By the definition of this quotient ring, the element $alpha=x+langle f(x) rangle$ is a root of the polynomial $f(x)$. Suppose $beta$ is the other root, then sum of roots=-coefficient of $x$ term gives
$$alpha + beta =-1=2.$$
So
$$beta=2-alpha=2-[x+langle f(x) rangle]=(2+2x)+langle f(x) rangle.$$
Observe that this is also an element of $Bbb{F}_9$ defined as above. Thus the polynomial $f(x)$ can be factored into linear factors in $Bbb{F}_9$. This means it splits completely in $Bbb{F}_9$.
Note: In case you want to view $Bbb{F}_9$ as a vector space over $Bbb{Z}_3$ with a basis
$${mathbf{1}+langle f(x) rangle,mathbf{x}+langle f(x) rangle}.$$
Then consider the vector $beta=2(mathbf{1}+langle f(x) rangle)+2(mathbf{x}+langle f(x) rangle)=mathbf{2+2x}+langle f(x) rangle in Bbb{F}_9$ lying in this vector space. Observe that this $beta$ is the other root of $f(x)$. Hence $f(x)$ splits completely.
Thank you for answer. I almost understand what you said. One thing I want to ask is how we can set $x^2+x+2=0$ in the quotient ring such that all elements of the quotient ring could be considered only polynomial part. is it possible?
– fivestar
Nov 20 at 8:15
@fivestar I'm not sure if I understand your question completely. But let me try: the idea is when we are taking quotients, then in a sense we are dividing out by that quantity and only focusing on the remainders (think division algorithm). So when we take $mod x^2+x+2$, the remainder of any polynomial modulo this polynomial is of degree at most $1$, so all elements are of the form $ax+b$.
– Anurag A
Nov 20 at 8:18
aha . I unserstand your explaination thank you!!
– fivestar
Nov 20 at 8:31
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
Firstly note that $x^2+x+2$ is an irreducible polynomial over $Bbb{Z}_3$ because it has no linear factors (since it is degree $2$, so enough to check linear factors). So we consider the quotient ring
$$Bbb{F}_9=Bbb{Z}_3[x]/langle f(x) rangle=Bbb{Z}_3[x]/langle x^2+x+2 rangle={ax+b , | , a,b in Bbb{Z}_3 text{ and } x^2+x+2=0}.$$
One can use the irreducibility of $f(x)$ (hence the ideal $langle f(x) rangle$ is maximal etc.) to claim that $Bbb{F}_9$ is indeed a field.
By the definition of this quotient ring, the element $alpha=x+langle f(x) rangle$ is a root of the polynomial $f(x)$. Suppose $beta$ is the other root, then sum of roots=-coefficient of $x$ term gives
$$alpha + beta =-1=2.$$
So
$$beta=2-alpha=2-[x+langle f(x) rangle]=(2+2x)+langle f(x) rangle.$$
Observe that this is also an element of $Bbb{F}_9$ defined as above. Thus the polynomial $f(x)$ can be factored into linear factors in $Bbb{F}_9$. This means it splits completely in $Bbb{F}_9$.
Note: In case you want to view $Bbb{F}_9$ as a vector space over $Bbb{Z}_3$ with a basis
$${mathbf{1}+langle f(x) rangle,mathbf{x}+langle f(x) rangle}.$$
Then consider the vector $beta=2(mathbf{1}+langle f(x) rangle)+2(mathbf{x}+langle f(x) rangle)=mathbf{2+2x}+langle f(x) rangle in Bbb{F}_9$ lying in this vector space. Observe that this $beta$ is the other root of $f(x)$. Hence $f(x)$ splits completely.
Thank you for answer. I almost understand what you said. One thing I want to ask is how we can set $x^2+x+2=0$ in the quotient ring such that all elements of the quotient ring could be considered only polynomial part. is it possible?
– fivestar
Nov 20 at 8:15
@fivestar I'm not sure if I understand your question completely. But let me try: the idea is when we are taking quotients, then in a sense we are dividing out by that quantity and only focusing on the remainders (think division algorithm). So when we take $mod x^2+x+2$, the remainder of any polynomial modulo this polynomial is of degree at most $1$, so all elements are of the form $ax+b$.
– Anurag A
Nov 20 at 8:18
aha . I unserstand your explaination thank you!!
– fivestar
Nov 20 at 8:31
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
Firstly note that $x^2+x+2$ is an irreducible polynomial over $Bbb{Z}_3$ because it has no linear factors (since it is degree $2$, so enough to check linear factors). So we consider the quotient ring
$$Bbb{F}_9=Bbb{Z}_3[x]/langle f(x) rangle=Bbb{Z}_3[x]/langle x^2+x+2 rangle={ax+b , | , a,b in Bbb{Z}_3 text{ and } x^2+x+2=0}.$$
One can use the irreducibility of $f(x)$ (hence the ideal $langle f(x) rangle$ is maximal etc.) to claim that $Bbb{F}_9$ is indeed a field.
By the definition of this quotient ring, the element $alpha=x+langle f(x) rangle$ is a root of the polynomial $f(x)$. Suppose $beta$ is the other root, then sum of roots=-coefficient of $x$ term gives
$$alpha + beta =-1=2.$$
So
$$beta=2-alpha=2-[x+langle f(x) rangle]=(2+2x)+langle f(x) rangle.$$
Observe that this is also an element of $Bbb{F}_9$ defined as above. Thus the polynomial $f(x)$ can be factored into linear factors in $Bbb{F}_9$. This means it splits completely in $Bbb{F}_9$.
Note: In case you want to view $Bbb{F}_9$ as a vector space over $Bbb{Z}_3$ with a basis
$${mathbf{1}+langle f(x) rangle,mathbf{x}+langle f(x) rangle}.$$
Then consider the vector $beta=2(mathbf{1}+langle f(x) rangle)+2(mathbf{x}+langle f(x) rangle)=mathbf{2+2x}+langle f(x) rangle in Bbb{F}_9$ lying in this vector space. Observe that this $beta$ is the other root of $f(x)$. Hence $f(x)$ splits completely.
Thank you for answer. I almost understand what you said. One thing I want to ask is how we can set $x^2+x+2=0$ in the quotient ring such that all elements of the quotient ring could be considered only polynomial part. is it possible?
– fivestar
Nov 20 at 8:15
@fivestar I'm not sure if I understand your question completely. But let me try: the idea is when we are taking quotients, then in a sense we are dividing out by that quantity and only focusing on the remainders (think division algorithm). So when we take $mod x^2+x+2$, the remainder of any polynomial modulo this polynomial is of degree at most $1$, so all elements are of the form $ax+b$.
– Anurag A
Nov 20 at 8:18
aha . I unserstand your explaination thank you!!
– fivestar
Nov 20 at 8:31
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
Firstly note that $x^2+x+2$ is an irreducible polynomial over $Bbb{Z}_3$ because it has no linear factors (since it is degree $2$, so enough to check linear factors). So we consider the quotient ring
$$Bbb{F}_9=Bbb{Z}_3[x]/langle f(x) rangle=Bbb{Z}_3[x]/langle x^2+x+2 rangle={ax+b , | , a,b in Bbb{Z}_3 text{ and } x^2+x+2=0}.$$
One can use the irreducibility of $f(x)$ (hence the ideal $langle f(x) rangle$ is maximal etc.) to claim that $Bbb{F}_9$ is indeed a field.
By the definition of this quotient ring, the element $alpha=x+langle f(x) rangle$ is a root of the polynomial $f(x)$. Suppose $beta$ is the other root, then sum of roots=-coefficient of $x$ term gives
$$alpha + beta =-1=2.$$
So
$$beta=2-alpha=2-[x+langle f(x) rangle]=(2+2x)+langle f(x) rangle.$$
Observe that this is also an element of $Bbb{F}_9$ defined as above. Thus the polynomial $f(x)$ can be factored into linear factors in $Bbb{F}_9$. This means it splits completely in $Bbb{F}_9$.
Note: In case you want to view $Bbb{F}_9$ as a vector space over $Bbb{Z}_3$ with a basis
$${mathbf{1}+langle f(x) rangle,mathbf{x}+langle f(x) rangle}.$$
Then consider the vector $beta=2(mathbf{1}+langle f(x) rangle)+2(mathbf{x}+langle f(x) rangle)=mathbf{2+2x}+langle f(x) rangle in Bbb{F}_9$ lying in this vector space. Observe that this $beta$ is the other root of $f(x)$. Hence $f(x)$ splits completely.
Firstly note that $x^2+x+2$ is an irreducible polynomial over $Bbb{Z}_3$ because it has no linear factors (since it is degree $2$, so enough to check linear factors). So we consider the quotient ring
$$Bbb{F}_9=Bbb{Z}_3[x]/langle f(x) rangle=Bbb{Z}_3[x]/langle x^2+x+2 rangle={ax+b , | , a,b in Bbb{Z}_3 text{ and } x^2+x+2=0}.$$
One can use the irreducibility of $f(x)$ (hence the ideal $langle f(x) rangle$ is maximal etc.) to claim that $Bbb{F}_9$ is indeed a field.
By the definition of this quotient ring, the element $alpha=x+langle f(x) rangle$ is a root of the polynomial $f(x)$. Suppose $beta$ is the other root, then sum of roots=-coefficient of $x$ term gives
$$alpha + beta =-1=2.$$
So
$$beta=2-alpha=2-[x+langle f(x) rangle]=(2+2x)+langle f(x) rangle.$$
Observe that this is also an element of $Bbb{F}_9$ defined as above. Thus the polynomial $f(x)$ can be factored into linear factors in $Bbb{F}_9$. This means it splits completely in $Bbb{F}_9$.
Note: In case you want to view $Bbb{F}_9$ as a vector space over $Bbb{Z}_3$ with a basis
$${mathbf{1}+langle f(x) rangle,mathbf{x}+langle f(x) rangle}.$$
Then consider the vector $beta=2(mathbf{1}+langle f(x) rangle)+2(mathbf{x}+langle f(x) rangle)=mathbf{2+2x}+langle f(x) rangle in Bbb{F}_9$ lying in this vector space. Observe that this $beta$ is the other root of $f(x)$. Hence $f(x)$ splits completely.
edited Nov 20 at 8:13
answered Nov 20 at 7:55
Anurag A
25k12249
25k12249
Thank you for answer. I almost understand what you said. One thing I want to ask is how we can set $x^2+x+2=0$ in the quotient ring such that all elements of the quotient ring could be considered only polynomial part. is it possible?
– fivestar
Nov 20 at 8:15
@fivestar I'm not sure if I understand your question completely. But let me try: the idea is when we are taking quotients, then in a sense we are dividing out by that quantity and only focusing on the remainders (think division algorithm). So when we take $mod x^2+x+2$, the remainder of any polynomial modulo this polynomial is of degree at most $1$, so all elements are of the form $ax+b$.
– Anurag A
Nov 20 at 8:18
aha . I unserstand your explaination thank you!!
– fivestar
Nov 20 at 8:31
add a comment |
Thank you for answer. I almost understand what you said. One thing I want to ask is how we can set $x^2+x+2=0$ in the quotient ring such that all elements of the quotient ring could be considered only polynomial part. is it possible?
– fivestar
Nov 20 at 8:15
@fivestar I'm not sure if I understand your question completely. But let me try: the idea is when we are taking quotients, then in a sense we are dividing out by that quantity and only focusing on the remainders (think division algorithm). So when we take $mod x^2+x+2$, the remainder of any polynomial modulo this polynomial is of degree at most $1$, so all elements are of the form $ax+b$.
– Anurag A
Nov 20 at 8:18
aha . I unserstand your explaination thank you!!
– fivestar
Nov 20 at 8:31
Thank you for answer. I almost understand what you said. One thing I want to ask is how we can set $x^2+x+2=0$ in the quotient ring such that all elements of the quotient ring could be considered only polynomial part. is it possible?
– fivestar
Nov 20 at 8:15
Thank you for answer. I almost understand what you said. One thing I want to ask is how we can set $x^2+x+2=0$ in the quotient ring such that all elements of the quotient ring could be considered only polynomial part. is it possible?
– fivestar
Nov 20 at 8:15
@fivestar I'm not sure if I understand your question completely. But let me try: the idea is when we are taking quotients, then in a sense we are dividing out by that quantity and only focusing on the remainders (think division algorithm). So when we take $mod x^2+x+2$, the remainder of any polynomial modulo this polynomial is of degree at most $1$, so all elements are of the form $ax+b$.
– Anurag A
Nov 20 at 8:18
@fivestar I'm not sure if I understand your question completely. But let me try: the idea is when we are taking quotients, then in a sense we are dividing out by that quantity and only focusing on the remainders (think division algorithm). So when we take $mod x^2+x+2$, the remainder of any polynomial modulo this polynomial is of degree at most $1$, so all elements are of the form $ax+b$.
– Anurag A
Nov 20 at 8:18
aha . I unserstand your explaination thank you!!
– fivestar
Nov 20 at 8:31
aha . I unserstand your explaination thank you!!
– fivestar
Nov 20 at 8:31
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.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- 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.
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%2f3006045%2fhow-can-we-consider-bbb-z-3x-langle-x2x2-rangle-as-splitting-field-for%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