# Subsets of Euclidean domains possessing a unique division algorithm

Save this PDF as:

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Subsets of Euclidean domains possessing a unique division algorithm"

## Transcription

1 Subsets of Euclidean domains possessing a unique division algorithm Andrew D. Lewis 2009/03/16 Abstract Subsets of a Euclidean domain are characterised with the following objectives: (1) ensuring uniqueness of the quotient and remainder in the Division Algorithm; (2) permitting unique base expansion with respect to any nonzero nonunit in the ring; (3) allowing explicit solutions to Bézout s identity with norm constraints. The two most popular examples of Euclidean domains, the ring of integers Z and the ring F[ξ] of polynomials over a field F, possess slightly different properties. For example, in Z the quotient and remainder from the Division Algorithm are generally not unique (becoming so when one restricts to positive integers), while the quotient and remainder in F[ξ] are unique. Indeed, Jodeit Jr. [1967] shows that any Euclidean domain with a unique Division Algorithm is isomorphic to either a field or to the polynomial ring over a field. The differences in the two rings Z and F[ξ] also shows up in two other commonly presented results which derive from the Division Algorithm: (1) the expansion of elements of the ring in terms of a base (which is taken to be a nonzero nonunit); (2) the computation, using the Euclidean Algorithm, of solutions to Bézout s identity for coprime ring elements, and with constraints on the Euclidean norms of the solution. For the base expansion in Z, to ensure uniqueness one again needs to restrict to positive integers, whereas the base expansion is always unique in F[ξ]. Moreover, the proofs in the two cases are typically carried out separately, or the proof of one is (not entirely accurately) suggested to follow just like the proof of the other. This leads to the natural question, Is there a property of subsets of Euclidean domains which ensures, in these subsets: (1) uniqueness of the quotient and remainder; (2) uniqueness of base expansion; (3) norm bounds in the Euclidean Algorithm. We show that there is indeed such a property, and it is quite simple we call this property δ-positivity. Let us review the basic features of Euclidean domains, and provide the new definitions that will be used to prove some useful results for Euclidean domains having these properties. If A is a subset of B we write A B, using the notation A B to denote proper inclusion. We denote by Z >0 the set of positive integers and by Z 0 the set of nonnegative integers. For an integral domain R we let 1 R denote the unit element and 0 R denote the zero element. For a field F, F[ξ] denotes the polynomial ring with coefficients in F. By deg(a) we denote the degree of A F[ξ], with the convention that deg(0 F[ξ] ) =. Since there is not perfect agreement on what properties should be assigned to a Euclidean norm, let us first say exactly what we mean in this paper by a Euclidean domain. A Professor, Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Queen s University, Kingston, ON K7L 3N6, Canada URL: Research supported in part by a grant from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada 1

2 2 A. D. Lewis Euclidean domain is a pair (R, δ), where R is an integral domain and where the map δ : R Z 0, called the norm, has the following properties: 1. if a, b R and if ab 0 R, then δ(ab) δ(a); 2. if a, b R with b 0 R, then there exists q, r R such that (a) a = qb + r and such that (b) δ(r) < δ(b). We shall make use of the following facts about Euclidean domains, without explicit mention: 1. δ(0 R ) < δ(1 R ); 2. if a R \ {0 R } then δ(a) δ(1 R ); 3. δ(a) = δ(0 R ) if and only if a = 0 R ; 4. for a R \ {0 R }, δ(ab) = δ(a) if and only if b is a unit; 5. a R is a unit if and only if δ(a) = δ(1 R ). Now let us give a few new definitions. 1 Definition: Let (R, δ) be a Euclidean domain. (i) A subset C R is trivial if C = {0 R }, and is nontrivial otherwise. (ii) A nonempty subset C R is δ-closed if, for each a, b C with b 0 R, there exists q, r C such that a = qb + r and such that δ(r) < δ(b). (iii) A subset C R admits a unique Division Algorithm if, for each a, b C with b 0 R, there exists unique q, r C such that a = qb + r and such that δ(r) < δ(b). (iv) A nonempty subset P R is δ-positive if, for each a, b P, we have δ(a b) max{δ(a), δ(b)}. In this paper we will be interested in nontrivial, δ-closed, and δ-positive subsemirings of Euclidean domains, recalling that a subsemiring S R has the property that if a, b S then ab S and a + b S. Let us give the two primary examples which illustrate the preceding concepts. 2 Examples: 1. For the ring Z we take the usual Euclidean norm: δ(k) = k. One can easily verify using elementary properties of integers that the subset Z 0 Z is a nontrivial, δ-closed, and δ-positive subsemiring. Note, however, that Z is not a δ-positive subset of itself since, for example, δ(1 ( 2)) = 3 > max{δ(1), δ(2)}. 2. Let F be a field and define δ : F[ξ] Z 0 by { 0, A = 0 δ(a) = F[ξ], deg(a) + 1, A 0 F[ξ].

3 Subsets of Euclidean domains possessing a unique division algorithm 3 The pair (F[ξ], δ) is then well known to be a Euclidean domain. We claim that F[ξ] is a δ-positive subset of itself. If either A or B is nonzero, then δ(a B) = deg(a B) + 1 max{deg(a), deg(b)} + 1 = max{deg(a) + 1, deg(b) + 1} = max{δ(a), δ(b)}, and, if A = B = 0 F[ξ], then δ(a B) = max{δ(a), δ(b)}. This shows that F[ξ] is indeed δ-positive. The following property of nontrivial δ-closed subsets is useful. 3 Lemma: If (R, δ) is a Euclidean domain and if S R is a nontrivial δ-closed subsemiring, then 0 R, 1 R S. Proof: Let b S {0 R }. Since S is δ-closed there exists q, r S such that b = qb + r with δ(r) < δ(b). We claim that this implies that q = 1 R and r = 0 R. Suppose that q 1 R. Then δ(b) δ((1 R q)b) = δ(r) < δ(b) which is a contradiction. Thus q = 1 R, and it then follows that r = 0 R. Let us first explore the relationship between δ-positivity and uniqueness in the Division Algorithm. Note that, for the Euclidean domain (Z, δ), we do not generally have such uniqueness since, for example, we can write 6 = = Proposition: If (R, δ) is a Euclidean domain and if S is a nontrivial, δ-closed, and δ- positive subsemiring of R, then S admits a unique Division Algorithm. Proof: Suppose that a = q 1 b + r 1 = q 2 b + r 2 for q 1, q 2, r 1, r 2 S with δ(r 1 ), δ(r 2 ) < δ(b). Then (q 1 q 2 )b = r 2 r 1, and so δ((q 1 q 2 )b) = δ(r 1 r 2 ) max{δ(r 1 ), δ(r 2 )} < δ(b), using δ-closedness of S. This implies that (q 1 q 2 )b = 0 R. Since b 0 R this implies that q 1 q 2 = 0 R and so q 1 = q 2. We then immediately have r 1 = r 2. The condition of δ-positivity is, in certain circumstances, also necessary for uniqueness in the Division Algorithm. 5 Proposition: Let (R, δ) be a Euclidean domain and let S R be a nontrivial, δ-closed subsemiring with the following properties: (i) S generates R as a ring; (ii) S admits a unique Division Algorithm. Then S is δ-positive. Proof: Note that since S is a subsemiring, S generates R as a ring if and only if, for every r R, it holds that either r S or r S. Suppose that S is not δ-positive so that δ(a b) > max{δ(a), δ(b)} for some a, b S. Suppose that b a S. Then b = 0 R (b a) + b, b = 1 R (b a) + a, δ(b) < δ(b a), δ(a) < δ(b a), which shows that S does not admit a unique Division Algorithm. argument gives the same conclusion when a b S. An entirely similar

4 4 A. D. Lewis Next we show that base expansion is valid in δ-positive subsets. Again, while base expansions exist for all integers, in order to ensure uniqueness of the coefficients in the expansion, one needs to restrict to positive integers to obtain uniqueness. Much of the proof we give is to be found in standard texts, but we give all of the details in order to illustrate exactly where our additional hypothesis of δ-positivity is used. 6 Proposition: Let (R, δ) be a Euclidean domain, let S R be a nontrivial, δ-closed, and δ-positive subsemiring, and let b S be a nonzero nonunit. Then, given a S \ {0 R }, there exists a unique k Z 0 and unique r 0, r 1,..., r k S such that (i) r k 0 R, (ii) δ(r 0 ), δ(r 1 ),..., δ(r k ) < δ(b) and (iii) a = r 0 + r 1 b + r 2 b r k b k. Proof: We prove the result by induction on δ(a). By Lemma 3 we have inf{δ(a) a S} = 0. Since we do not consider the case δ(a) = δ(0 R ), first consider a R such that δ(a) = δ(1 R ). Then a is a unit. Thus, since b is a nonzero nonunit, we have δ(a) < δ(b), and the existence part of the result follows by taking k = 0 and r 0 = a. Now suppose that the result holds for all a S such that δ(a) {δ(1 R,..., m}. Let a be such that δ(a) = inf{δ(r) r S, δ(r) > m}. If δ(a) < δ(b) then take k = 0 and r 0 = a to give existence in this case. Otherwise, apply the Division Algorithm to give a = qb + r with δ(r) < δ(b). Since S is δ-closed, we can moreover suppose that q, r S. Now, since b is a nonzero nonunit, since we are supposing that δ(a) δ(b) > δ(r), and since S is δ-positive, δ(q) < δ(qb) = δ(a r) max{δ(a), δ(r)} = δ(a). Therefore, we may apply the induction hypothesis to q to give q = r 0 + r 1b + r 2b r k bk for some k Z 0 and for r 0, r 1,..., r k S. Then a = (r 0 + r 1b + r 2b r k bk )b + r = r + r 0b + r 1b r k bk+1, showing that the existence part of the result holds for δ(a) = inf{δ(r) r S, δ(r) > m}. This proves the existence part of the result for all a S by induction. We also prove the uniqueness assertion by induction on δ(a). First we use a technical lemma concerning the general expansion of 0 R in the base b.

5 Subsets of Euclidean domains possessing a unique division algorithm 5 Lemma: Let (R, δ) be a Euclidean domain with b R a nonzero nonunit. If k Z 0 and r 0, r 1,..., r k R satisfy (i) r 0 + r 1 b + r 2 b r k b k = 0 R and (ii) δ(r 0 ), δ(r 1 ),..., δ(r k ) < δ(b), then r 0 = r 1 = = r k = 0 R. Proof: We prove this by induction on k. For k = 0 the result is trivial. For k = 1 we have r 0 + r 1 b = 0 R, and we claim that r 0 = r 1 = 0 R. Suppose that r 1 0 R. Then δ(b) δ(r 1 b) = δ( r 0 ) = δ(r 0 ) < δ(b), which is a contradiction. Thus r 1 = 0 R, and then also r 0 = 0 R. Now suppose the result holds for k {0, 1,..., m} and consider the expression 0 R = r 0 + r 1 b + r 2 b r m+1 b m+1 = (r 1 + r 2 b + + r m+1 b m )b + r 0. Since the result holds for k = 1, it follows that r 1 + r 2 b + + r m+1 b m = 0 R, r 0 = 0 R. By the induction hypothesis, r 1 = r 2 = = r m+1 = 0 R, and so the result follows. Now we carry on with the uniqueness part of the proof. First consider the case when δ(a) = δ(1 R ). Then, since b is a nonzero nonunit, δ(a) < δ(b). Suppose that a = r 0 + r 1 b + r 2 b r k b k = (r 1 + r 2 b + + r k b k 1 )b + r 0 (1) for r 0, r 1,..., r k S with δ(r 0 ), δ(r 1 ),..., δ(r k ) < δ(b). By Proposition 4 there is only one way to express a as qb + r with δ(r) < δ(b) and with q, r S, and from the existence part of the proof we know that this implies that r 1 + r 2 b + + r k b k 1 = 0 R, r 0 = a. By the lemma we can then assert that r 1 = = r k = 0 R, and so we must have k = 0 and r 0 = a as the unique solution to (1). Thus the result holds when δ(a) = δ(1 R ). Next suppose the result true for δ(a) {δ(1 R,..., m}, and suppose that a S satisfies Then suppose that δ(a) = inf{δ(r) r S, δ(r) > m}. a = r 0 + r 1 b + + r k b k = r 0 + r 1b + + r k bk for k, k Z 0, r 0, r 1,..., r k S, and r 0, r 1,..., r k S satisfying δ(r j ), δ(r j ) < δ(b) for j {0, 1,..., k} and j {0, 1,..., k }. Also suppose that r k, r k 0 R. Then (r 1 + r 2 b + + r k b k 1 ) b + r } {{ } 0 = (r 1 + r 2b + + r k 1 bk ) b + r } {{ } 0. q q

6 6 A. D. Lewis By Proposition 4 we have q = q and r 0 = r 0. First suppose that δ(a) < δ(b). Then, by Proposition 4, we have q = q = 0 R and r 0 = r 0 = a. By the lemma it follows that r 1 = = r k = 0 R and r 1 = = r k = 0 R, and so we have k = k = 0 and r 0 = r 0 = a. Next suppose that δ(a) δ(b). Then it follows that q, q 0 R, since otherwise we have a = r 0 = r 0, contradicting the fact that δ(r 0), δ(r 0 ) < δ(b). Then we have δ(q) < δ(qb) = δ(a r 0 ) max{δ(a), δ(r 0 )} = δ(a) since b is a nonzero nonunit and since δ(a) δ(b) > δ(r 0 ). Similarly, δ(q ) < δ(a). Therefore, the induction hypothesis applies to q and q and we conclude that k 1 = k 1 and r j = r j for j {1,..., k}, so proving the uniqueness part of the result by induction on δ(a). The preceding base expansion result has the following consequence which will be useful to us in our proof below of the norm bounds in the Euclidean Algorithm. 7 Proposition: Let (R, δ) be a Euclidean domain, let S R be a nontrivial, δ-closed, and δ-positive subsemiring of R, and let If U S and if x S satisfies U = {r S r is a unit} {0 R }. δ(x) = inf{δ(r) r S, δ(r) > δ(1 R )}, then, for a S \ {0 R }, there exists a unique k Z 0 and c 0, c 1,..., c k U such that (i) c k 0 R and (ii) a = c 0 + c 1 x + + c k x k. Moreover, if U S and if a, b S \ {0 R } are written as a = c 0 + c 1 x + + c k x k, b = d 0 + d 1 x + + d l x l for c 0, c 1,..., c k, d 0, d 1,..., d l U such that c k, d l 0 R, then δ(a) > δ(b) if and only if k > l. Proof: Since x is a nonzero nonunit, from Proposition 6 we can write a = c 0 +c 1 x+ +c k x k for unique c 0, c 1,..., c k S with c k 0 R and δ(c 0 ), δ(c 1 ),..., δ(c k ) < δ(x). The hypotheses on x immediately give c 0, c 1,..., c k U. Now let a and b be as stated in the second assertion and write a = qb + r for q, r S with δ(r) < δ(b), this being possible by δ-closedness of S. Let us assume that δ(a) > δ(b). We will show by induction on δ(b) that k > l. First suppose that δ(b) = δ(1 R ) so that b U. Since δ(a) > δ(b) it follows that a is a nonzero nonunit and so, by the first part of the result, k > 1, giving the result in this case. Assume the result holds for δ(b) {δ(1 R ),..., n} and suppose that δ(b) = inf{δ(r) r c, δ(r) > n}. We claim that the hypothesis that δ(a) > δ(b) implies that q is a nonzero nonunit. If q = 0 R then a = r and so δ(b) > δ(r) = δ(a), in contradiction with our assumption. If q is a unit then δ(b) = δ(qb) = δ(a r) = δ(a),

7 Subsets of Euclidean domains possessing a unique division algorithm 7 the last equality holding since δ(r) < δ(b) < δ(a) and since δ(a r) max{δ(a), δ(r)} by δ-positivity of S. Thus q being a unit leads to the contradiction δ(b) = δ(a). Since q is a nonzero nonunit, by the first conclusion of the proposition we have q = u 0 +u 1 x+ +u m x m for m Z >0 with u 0, u 1,..., u m U and u m 0 R. Since δ(r) < δ(b) the induction hypotheses imply that r = v 0 + v 1 x + + v p x p for p < l with v 0, v 1,..., v p U and v p 0 R. Therefore, a = c 0 + c 1 x + + c k x k = (u 0 + u 1 x + + u m x m )(d 0 + d 1 x + + d l x l ) + v 0 + v 1 x + + v p x p, from which we deduce that k > l since R is a domain and since p < m + l. Now assume that k > l. Let us write q = u 0 + u 1 x + + u m x m, r = v 0 + v 1 x + + v p x p with u 0, u 1,..., u m, v 0, v 1,..., v p U and u m, v p 0 R. Since δ(r) < δ(b) the previous part of the proof gives p < l. By the uniqueness part of Proposition 6 we must have m = k l > 0. Therefore, again by the uniqueness part of Proposition 6, we conclude that q is not a unit and so δ(q) > δ(1 R ). Therefore, δ(b) < δ(qb) = δ(a r) max{δ(a), δ(r)} = δ(a), the last equality holding since δ(r) < δ(b). This gives the result. Note that as a consequence of this, the characterisation of Jodeit Jr. [1967] of Euclidean rings admitting a unique division algorithm follows straightforwardly. 8 Corollary: If (R, δ) is a Euclidean domain that admits a unique Division Algorithm, then (i) the set of units in R forms a field which we denote by F R and (ii) if F R R then R is isomorphic to F R [ξ]. Proof: We claim that R admits a unique Division Algorithm if and only if δ(a + b) max{δ(a), δ(b)} for every a, b R. Certainly, if δ(a+b) max{δ(a), δ(b)} for every a, b R, then R is a δ-closed and δ-positive subsemiring of itself, and then uniqueness of quotient and remainder follows from Proposition 4. Conversely, suppose that a, b R \ {0 R } satisfy δ(a + b) > max{δ(a), δ(b)}. Then we can write a = 0 R (a + b) + a with δ(a) < δ(a + b) and also a = 1 R (a + b) + ( b) with δ( b) < δ(a + b). Thus R does not admit a unique Division Algorithm. That the units in R form a field will follow if we can show that, if units a, b R satisfy a + b 0 R, then a + b is a unit. This, however, follows since δ(1 R ) δ(a + b) max{δ(a), δ(b)} = δ(1 R ), and so δ(a + b) = δ(1 R ), implying that a + b is a unit. The final assertion of the corollary follows from Proposition 7 since every r R can be written as r = a 0 + a 1 x + + a k x k

8 8 A. D. Lewis for unique a 0, a 1,..., a k F R with a k 0 R and with x as defined in the statement of Proposition 7. We then easily see that the map R a 0 + a 1 x + + a k x k a 0 + a 1 ξ + + a k ξ k F R [ξ] is the desired isomorphism. The final theorem we state concerns solutions to Bézout s identity, which states that, if a, b R are elements of a principal ideal domain, then a and b are coprime if and only if there exists r, s R such that ra + bs = 1 R. One way to compute r and s for Euclidean domains involves the Euclidean Algorithm. To establish notation, let us recall that the Euclidean Algorithm states that, if (R, δ) is a Euclidean domain and if a, b R with b 0 R, then there exists k Z 0, q 0, q 1,..., q k R, and r 0 = b, r 1,..., r k R \ {0 R } such that a = q 0 r 0 + r 1, δ(r 1 ) < δ(r 0 ), r 0 = q 1 r 1 + r 2, δ(r 2 ) < δ(r 1 ),. (2) r k 2 = q k 1 r k 1 + r k, δ(r k ) < δ(r k 1 ), r k 1 = q k r k. Moreover, it turns out that r k as it appears in the Euclidean Algorithm is a greatest common divisor for a and b. In particular, if a and b are coprime, then r k is a unit. Moreover, as we shall see in our next theorem, one can use the Euclidean Algorithm to find r, s R such that ra + bs = 1 R. In a Euclidean domain one can ask that r and s have norms satisfying some bound; the usual bounds are that δ(r) < δ(b) and δ(s) < δ(a). As we see in the following theorem, if one enforces δ-positivity, then the bounds are achieved by the (necessarily unique) solution obtained from the Euclidean Algorithm. Again, most of the steps in this theorem may be found in any textbook, but we give all of the details so as to reveal where the property of δ-positivity is used. 9 Theorem: If (R, δ) is a Euclidean domain and if a, b R\{0 R } are coprime, let k Z 0, q 0, q 1,..., q k R, and r 0 = b, r 1,..., r k 1 R \ {0 R } be such that a = q 0 r 0 + r 1, δ(r 1 ) < δ(r 0 ), r 0 = q 1 r 1 + r 2, δ(r 2 ) < δ(r 1 ),. r k 2 = q k 1 r k 1 + u, δ(u) < δ(r k 1 ), r k 1 = q k u, where u R is a unit (this being the case since a and b are coprime). Then let α 0 = 1 R and β 0 = q k 1, and recursively define α 1,..., α k 1 R and β 1,..., β k 1 R by α j = β j 1, β j = α j 1 q k 1 j β j 1, j {1,..., k 1}.

9 Subsets of Euclidean domains possessing a unique division algorithm 9 If we take r = { 0 R, δ(b) = δ(1 R ), u 1 α k 1, δ(b) > δ(1 R ), s = { b 1, δ(b) = δ(1 R ), u 1 β k 1, δ(b) > δ(1 R ), then ra + sb = 1 R. Moreover, if S R is a nontrivial, δ-closed, and δ-positive subsemiring, and if a and b additionally have the property that a, b S and that at least one of a and b is not a unit, then (i) q 0, q 1..., q k and r 1,..., r k 1 may be chosen to lie in S and, (ii) if q 0, q 1..., q k and r 1,..., r k 1 are so chosen, then r and s as defined above additionally satisfy δ(r) < δ(b) and δ(s) < δ(a). Proof: Let us first reduce to the case when u = 1 R. Multiply all equations in the Euclidean Algorithm for a and b by u 1 : u 1 a = q 0 u 1 r 0 + u 1 r 1, δ(u 1 r 1 ) < δ(u 1 r 0 ), u 1 r 0 = q 1 u 1 r 1 + u 1 r 2, δ(u 1 r 2 ) < δ(u 1 r 1 ),. u 1 r k 2 = q k 1 u 1 r k R, δ(1 R ) < δ(u 1 r k 1 ), u 1 r k 1 = q k. Note that the resulting equations hold if and only if the original equations hold, by virtue of R being an integral domain. The resulting equations are then the Euclidean Algorithm for u 1 a and u 1 b, and at each step the remainders r 0, r 1,..., r k 1 are multiplied by u 1. The quotients q 0, q 1,..., q k remain the same, however. Thus the definitions of α 0, α 1,..., α k 1 and β 0, β 1,..., β k 1 are unchanged from the Euclidean Algorithm for a and b. Applying the conclusions of the theorem to the modified Euclidean Algorithm then gives r, s R such that r (u 1 a) + s (u 1 b) = 1 R. Thus the conclusions of the first part of the theorem in the general case follow from those when u = 1 R by taking r = u 1 r and s = u 1 s. Also note that the relation δ(u 1 r j 1 ) < δ(u 1 r j ) is equivalent to the relation δ(r j 1 ) < δ(r j ), j {0, 1,..., k 1}. Therefore, the conclusions of the second part of the theorem in the general case also follow from those for the case when u = 1 R. Thus, in the remainder of the proof we suppose that u = 1 R. Let us also eliminate the case where δ(b) = δ(1 R ). If this is the case then we have a = qb + r with δ(r) = δ(0 R ), and so r = 0 R. Therefore, since b is a unit, q = ab 1. Now, taking r = 0 R and s = b 1, we have ra + sb = 1 R. Moreover, for the second part of the theorem, δ(r) < δ(b) and δ(s) < δ(a) since s is a unit and a is not, the latter by the hypotheses of the theorem. Thus the conclusions of the theorem hold when δ(b) = δ(1 R ). Thus, in the remainder of the proof we suppose that b is a nonzero nonunit. We now prove the theorem by induction on k. If k = 1 then we have a = q 0 r R, δ(1 R ) < δ(r 0 ), r 0 = q 1.

10 10 A. D. Lewis Thus 1 R = 1 R a + ( q 0 ) b, and the theorem holds with r = α 0 = 1 R and s = β 0 = q 0. Now suppose the theorem true for k {1,..., m 1} and consider the Euclidean Algorithm for a and b = r 0 of the form a = q 0 r 0 + r 1, δ(r 1 ) < δ(r 0 ), r 0 = q 1 r 1 + r 2, δ(r 2 ) < δ(r 1 ),. r m 2 = q m 1 r m R, δ(1 R ) < δ(r m 1 ), r m 1 = q m. By the induction hypothesis, the conclusions of the theorem hold for the last m equations. But the last m equations are the result of applying the Euclidean Algorithm in the case where a = r 0 and b = r 1. Thus, if we define α 0 = 1 R and β 0 = q k 1, and recursively define α 1,..., α m 2 and β 1,..., β m 2 by α j = β j 1, β j = α j 1 q m 1 j β j 1, j {1,..., m 2}, and if we take r = α m 2 and s = β m 2, then we have r r 0 + s r 1 = 1 R. Since r 0 = b we have 1 R = α m 2 r 0 + β m 2 (a q 0 r 0 ) = (α m 2 q 0 β m 2 )b + β m 2 a, and so the theorem holds with r = α m 1 = β m 2 and s = β m 1 = α m 2 q 0 β m 2, as desired. Now we proceed to the second part of the theorem, supposing that a, b S for a δ-closed and δ-positive subsemiring S R. Since r 0 = b, that q 0 and r 1 can be chosen to lie in S follows from the fact that S is δ-closed. This reasoning can then be applied to each line of the Euclidean Algorithm to ensure that all quotients and remainders can be chosen to lie in S. The following lemma records a useful property of these quotients and remainders. Lemma: Using the notation of the theorem statement, suppose that a, b S and that q 0, q 1,..., q k and r 1,..., r k 1 are chosen to lie in S. Then, for j {0, 1,..., k 1}, either (i) α j S and β j S or (ii) α j S and β j S. Proof: The lemma is proved by induction on j. For j = 0 we have α 0 = 1 R S and β 0 = q k 1 S. Suppose the lemma true for j {0, 1,..., m}. We have two cases. 1. α m S and β m S: We immediately have α m+1 = β m S. Also, β m+1 = α m q k 2 m β m S since α m S and q k m 2 ( β m ) S, using the semiring property of S. 2. α m S and β m S: This case follows, mutatis mutandis, in the manner of the previous case. Now, the final thing we need to show is that r and s constructed as above from a, b S satisfy δ(r) < δ(b) and δ(s) < δ(a). We prove this by induction on k. For k = 1 we have r = 1 R and s = q 0. Therefore, δ(r) = δ(1 R ) < δ(b)

11 Subsets of Euclidean domains possessing a unique division algorithm 11 since we are assuming that b is a nonzero nonunit. Also, since b is a nonzero nonunit, δ(s) = δ( q 0 ) < δ( q 0 b) = δ(a 1 R ) max{δ(a), δ(1 R )} δ(a), using δ-positivity of S. So the final assertion of the theorem holds for k = 1. Now suppose that this assertion holds for k {1,..., m 1} and consider the Euclidean Algorithm for a and b of the form a = q 0 r 0 + r 1, δ(r 1 ) < δ(r 0 ), r 0 = q 1 r 1 + r 2, δ(r 2 ) < δ(r 1 ),. r m 2 = q m 1 r m R, δ(1 R ) < δ(r m 1 ), r m 1 = q m. Considering the last m equations, as in the first part of the proof we have the Euclidean Algorithm for a = r 0 and b = r 1. Therefore, considering r, s R as constructed in the first part of the proof, we have δ(r ) < δ(r 1 ) and δ(s ) < δ(r 0 ). Again as in the first part of the proof, we take r = s and s = r q 0 s so that ra + sb = 1 R. Then δ(r) = δ(s ) < δ(r 0 ) = δ(b). It remains to show that δ(s) < δ(a). First suppose that δ(a) < δ(b). Then, by Proposition 4 we have a = 0 R b + a as the unique output of the Division Algorithm in S. Thus we must have q 0 = 0 R and r 1 = a. In this case, δ(s) = δ(r ) < δ(r 1 ) = δ(a), giving the norm bound for s if δ(a) < δ(b). Thus we consider the case when δ(b) δ(a). By the lemma we have either (1) r S and q 0 s S or (2) r S and q 0 s S. Consider the case r, q 0 s S. We then have a = q 0 b + r 1, s = q 0 s + r with δ(r 1 ) < δ(b), δ(s ) < δ(b), and δ(r ) < δ(r 1 ). Since a, q 0, b, r 1, s, s, r S we use Proposition 7 to write these elements of S as uniquely defined polynomials in x, where δ(x) = inf{δ(r) r S, δ(r) > δ(1 R )}. Let us denote these polynomials by P a, P q0, P b, P r1, P s, P s, and P r. By Proposition 7 we have This immediately gives δ(r 1 ) < δ(b) = deg(p r1 ) < deg(p b ), δ(s ) < δ(b) = deg(p s ) < deg(p b ), δ(r ) < δ(r 1 ) = deg(p r ) < deg(p r1 ). deg(p a ) = deg(p q0 ) + deg(p b ), deg(p s ) max{deg(p q0 ) + deg(p s ), deg(p r )}.

12 12 A. D. Lewis If then if then max{deg(p q0 ) + deg(p s ), deg(p r )} = deg(p q0 ) + deg(p s ) deg(p a ) = deg(p q0 ) + deg(p b ) > deg(p q0 ) + deg(p s ) deg(p s ) max{deg(p q0 ) + deg(p s ), deg(p r )} = deg(p r ) deg(p a ) = deg(p q0 ) + deg(p b ) > deg(p r1 ) > deg(p r ) deg(p s ). In either case we have deg(p s ) > deg(p a ), and then we apply Proposition 7 again to give δ(s) < δ(a) in the case when r, q 0 s S. When r, q 0 s S then s S and we write a = q 0 b + r 1, s = q 0 s + ( r ). The steps above may now be repeated to give δ(s) = δ( s) < δ(a) in this case. References Jodeit Jr., M. A. [1967]. Uniqueness in the division algorithm. The American Mathematical Monthly 74(1), pages issn: doi: /

### Continued Fractions and the Euclidean Algorithm

Continued Fractions and the Euclidean Algorithm Lecture notes prepared for MATH 326, Spring 997 Department of Mathematics and Statistics University at Albany William F Hammond Table of Contents Introduction

### 11 Ideals. 11.1 Revisiting Z

11 Ideals The presentation here is somewhat different than the text. In particular, the sections do not match up. We have seen issues with the failure of unique factorization already, e.g., Z[ 5] = O Q(

### Prime Numbers and Irreducible Polynomials

Prime Numbers and Irreducible Polynomials M. Ram Murty The similarity between prime numbers and irreducible polynomials has been a dominant theme in the development of number theory and algebraic geometry.

### FACTORING POLYNOMIALS IN THE RING OF FORMAL POWER SERIES OVER Z

FACTORING POLYNOMIALS IN THE RING OF FORMAL POWER SERIES OVER Z DANIEL BIRMAJER, JUAN B GIL, AND MICHAEL WEINER Abstract We consider polynomials with integer coefficients and discuss their factorization

### 8 Divisibility and prime numbers

8 Divisibility and prime numbers 8.1 Divisibility In this short section we extend the concept of a multiple from the natural numbers to the integers. We also summarize several other terms that express

### Lecture Notes on Polynomials

Lecture Notes on Polynomials Arne Jensen Department of Mathematical Sciences Aalborg University c 008 Introduction These lecture notes give a very short introduction to polynomials with real and complex

### Chapter 4, Arithmetic in F [x] Polynomial arithmetic and the division algorithm.

Chapter 4, Arithmetic in F [x] Polynomial arithmetic and the division algorithm. We begin by defining the ring of polynomials with coefficients in a ring R. After some preliminary results, we specialize

### Kevin James. MTHSC 412 Section 2.4 Prime Factors and Greatest Comm

MTHSC 412 Section 2.4 Prime Factors and Greatest Common Divisor Greatest Common Divisor Definition Suppose that a, b Z. Then we say that d Z is a greatest common divisor (gcd) of a and b if the following

### Mathematics Course 111: Algebra I Part IV: Vector Spaces

Mathematics Course 111: Algebra I Part IV: Vector Spaces D. R. Wilkins Academic Year 1996-7 9 Vector Spaces A vector space over some field K is an algebraic structure consisting of a set V on which are

### POLYNOMIAL RINGS AND UNIQUE FACTORIZATION DOMAINS

POLYNOMIAL RINGS AND UNIQUE FACTORIZATION DOMAINS RUSS WOODROOFE 1. Unique Factorization Domains Throughout the following, we think of R as sitting inside R[x] as the constant polynomials (of degree 0).

### CONTINUED FRACTIONS AND PELL S EQUATION. Contents 1. Continued Fractions 1 2. Solution to Pell s Equation 9 References 12

CONTINUED FRACTIONS AND PELL S EQUATION SEUNG HYUN YANG Abstract. In this REU paper, I will use some important characteristics of continued fractions to give the complete set of solutions to Pell s equation.

### PROBLEM SET 6: POLYNOMIALS

PROBLEM SET 6: POLYNOMIALS 1. introduction In this problem set we will consider polynomials with coefficients in K, where K is the real numbers R, the complex numbers C, the rational numbers Q or any other

### MATH10040 Chapter 2: Prime and relatively prime numbers

MATH10040 Chapter 2: Prime and relatively prime numbers Recall the basic definition: 1. Prime numbers Definition 1.1. Recall that a positive integer is said to be prime if it has precisely two positive

### Unique Factorization

Unique Factorization Waffle Mathcamp 2010 Throughout these notes, all rings will be assumed to be commutative. 1 Factorization in domains: definitions and examples In this class, we will study the phenomenon

### Quotient Rings and Field Extensions

Chapter 5 Quotient Rings and Field Extensions In this chapter we describe a method for producing field extension of a given field. If F is a field, then a field extension is a field K that contains F.

### z 0 and y even had the form

Gaussian Integers The concepts of divisibility, primality and factoring are actually more general than the discussion so far. For the moment, we have been working in the integers, which we denote by Z

### Some Polynomial Theorems. John Kennedy Mathematics Department Santa Monica College 1900 Pico Blvd. Santa Monica, CA 90405 rkennedy@ix.netcom.

Some Polynomial Theorems by John Kennedy Mathematics Department Santa Monica College 1900 Pico Blvd. Santa Monica, CA 90405 rkennedy@ix.netcom.com This paper contains a collection of 31 theorems, lemmas,

### The Division Algorithm for Polynomials Handout Monday March 5, 2012

The Division Algorithm for Polynomials Handout Monday March 5, 0 Let F be a field (such as R, Q, C, or F p for some prime p. This will allow us to divide by any nonzero scalar. (For some of the following,

### SUBGROUPS OF CYCLIC GROUPS. 1. Introduction In a group G, we denote the (cyclic) group of powers of some g G by

SUBGROUPS OF CYCLIC GROUPS KEITH CONRAD 1. Introduction In a group G, we denote the (cyclic) group of powers of some g G by g = {g k : k Z}. If G = g, then G itself is cyclic, with g as a generator. Examples

### Factoring Polynomials

Factoring Polynomials Sue Geller June 19, 2006 Factoring polynomials over the rational numbers, real numbers, and complex numbers has long been a standard topic of high school algebra. With the advent

### Elementary Number Theory We begin with a bit of elementary number theory, which is concerned

CONSTRUCTION OF THE FINITE FIELDS Z p S. R. DOTY Elementary Number Theory We begin with a bit of elementary number theory, which is concerned solely with questions about the set of integers Z = {0, ±1,

### GREATEST COMMON DIVISOR

DEFINITION: GREATEST COMMON DIVISOR The greatest common divisor (gcd) of a and b, denoted by (a, b), is the largest common divisor of integers a and b. THEOREM: If a and b are nonzero integers, then their

### (a) Write each of p and q as a polynomial in x with coefficients in Z[y, z]. deg(p) = 7 deg(q) = 9

Homework #01, due 1/20/10 = 9.1.2, 9.1.4, 9.1.6, 9.1.8, 9.2.3 Additional problems for study: 9.1.1, 9.1.3, 9.1.5, 9.1.13, 9.2.1, 9.2.2, 9.2.4, 9.2.5, 9.2.6, 9.3.2, 9.3.3 9.1.1 (This problem was not assigned

### CS 103X: Discrete Structures Homework Assignment 3 Solutions

CS 103X: Discrete Structures Homework Assignment 3 s Exercise 1 (20 points). On well-ordering and induction: (a) Prove the induction principle from the well-ordering principle. (b) Prove the well-ordering

### Prime Numbers. Chapter Primes and Composites

Chapter 2 Prime Numbers The term factoring or factorization refers to the process of expressing an integer as the product of two or more integers in a nontrivial way, e.g., 42 = 6 7. Prime numbers are

### DEGREES OF ORDERS ON TORSION-FREE ABELIAN GROUPS

DEGREES OF ORDERS ON TORSION-FREE ABELIAN GROUPS ASHER M. KACH, KAREN LANGE, AND REED SOLOMON Abstract. We construct two computable presentations of computable torsion-free abelian groups, one of isomorphism

### it is easy to see that α = a

21. Polynomial rings Let us now turn out attention to determining the prime elements of a polynomial ring, where the coefficient ring is a field. We already know that such a polynomial ring is a UF. Therefore

### Math 345-60 Abstract Algebra I Questions for Section 23: Factoring Polynomials over a Field

Math 345-60 Abstract Algebra I Questions for Section 23: Factoring Polynomials over a Field 1. Throughout this section, F is a field and F [x] is the ring of polynomials with coefficients in F. We will

### The Factor Theorem and a corollary of the Fundamental Theorem of Algebra

Math 421 Fall 2010 The Factor Theorem and a corollary of the Fundamental Theorem of Algebra 27 August 2010 Copyright 2006 2010 by Murray Eisenberg. All rights reserved. Prerequisites Mathematica Aside

### CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZERO SUM PROBLEMS

CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZERO SUM PROBLEMS S. D. ADHIKARI, Y. G. CHEN, J. B. FRIEDLANDER, S. V. KONYAGIN AND F. PAPPALARDI Abstract. A prototype of zero sum theorems, the well known theorem of Erdős, Ginzburg

### Factorization in Polynomial Rings

Factorization in Polynomial Rings These notes are a summary of some of the important points on divisibility in polynomial rings from 17 and 18 of Gallian s Contemporary Abstract Algebra. Most of the important

### Module MA3411: Abstract Algebra Galois Theory Appendix Michaelmas Term 2013

Module MA3411: Abstract Algebra Galois Theory Appendix Michaelmas Term 2013 D. R. Wilkins Copyright c David R. Wilkins 1997 2013 Contents A Cyclotomic Polynomials 79 A.1 Minimum Polynomials of Roots of

### Notes on Chapter 1, Section 2 Arithmetic and Divisibility

Notes on Chapter 1, Section 2 Arithmetic and Divisibility August 16, 2006 1 Arithmetic Properties of the Integers Recall that the set of integers is the set Z = f0; 1; 1; 2; 2; 3; 3; : : :g. The integers

### (x + a) n = x n + a Z n [x]. Proof. If n is prime then the map

22. A quick primality test Prime numbers are one of the most basic objects in mathematics and one of the most basic questions is to decide which numbers are prime (a clearly related problem is to find

### MODULAR ARITHMETIC. a smallest member. It is equivalent to the Principle of Mathematical Induction.

MODULAR ARITHMETIC 1 Working With Integers The usual arithmetic operations of addition, subtraction and multiplication can be performed on integers, and the result is always another integer Division, on

### Introduction to Finite Fields (cont.)

Chapter 6 Introduction to Finite Fields (cont.) 6.1 Recall Theorem. Z m is a field m is a prime number. Theorem (Subfield Isomorphic to Z p ). Every finite field has the order of a power of a prime number

### Appendix A. Appendix. A.1 Algebra. Fields and Rings

Appendix A Appendix A.1 Algebra Algebra is the foundation of algebraic geometry; here we collect some of the basic algebra on which we rely. We develop some algebraic background that is needed in the text.

### Breaking The Code. Ryan Lowe. Ryan Lowe is currently a Ball State senior with a double major in Computer Science and Mathematics and

Breaking The Code Ryan Lowe Ryan Lowe is currently a Ball State senior with a double major in Computer Science and Mathematics and a minor in Applied Physics. As a sophomore, he took an independent study

### Finite Sets. Theorem 5.1. Two non-empty finite sets have the same cardinality if and only if they are equivalent.

MATH 337 Cardinality Dr. Neal, WKU We now shall prove that the rational numbers are a countable set while R is uncountable. This result shows that there are two different magnitudes of infinity. But we

### MA2C03 Mathematics School of Mathematics, Trinity College Hilary Term 2016 Lecture 59 (April 1, 2016) David R. Wilkins

MA2C03 Mathematics School of Mathematics, Trinity College Hilary Term 2016 Lecture 59 (April 1, 2016) David R. Wilkins The RSA encryption scheme works as follows. In order to establish the necessary public

### 4 Unique Factorization and Applications

Number Theory (part 4): Unique Factorization and Applications (by Evan Dummit, 2014, v. 1.00) Contents 4 Unique Factorization and Applications 1 4.1 Integral Domains...............................................

### Notes from February 11

Notes from February 11 Math 130 Course web site: www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/5811 Two lemmas Before proving the theorem which was stated at the end of class on February 8, we begin with two lemmas. The

### IRREDUCIBLE OPERATOR SEMIGROUPS SUCH THAT AB AND BA ARE PROPORTIONAL. 1. Introduction

IRREDUCIBLE OPERATOR SEMIGROUPS SUCH THAT AB AND BA ARE PROPORTIONAL R. DRNOVŠEK, T. KOŠIR Dedicated to Prof. Heydar Radjavi on the occasion of his seventieth birthday. Abstract. Let S be an irreducible

### The Dirichlet Unit Theorem

Chapter 6 The Dirichlet Unit Theorem As usual, we will be working in the ring B of algebraic integers of a number field L. Two factorizations of an element of B are regarded as essentially the same if

### 8 Primes and Modular Arithmetic

8 Primes and Modular Arithmetic 8.1 Primes and Factors Over two millennia ago already, people all over the world were considering the properties of numbers. One of the simplest concepts is prime numbers.

### Integral Domains. As always in this course, a ring R is understood to be a commutative ring with unity.

Integral Domains As always in this course, a ring R is understood to be a commutative ring with unity. 1 First definitions and properties Definition 1.1. Let R be a ring. A divisor of zero or zero divisor

### 7. Some irreducible polynomials

7. Some irreducible polynomials 7.1 Irreducibles over a finite field 7.2 Worked examples Linear factors x α of a polynomial P (x) with coefficients in a field k correspond precisely to roots α k [1] of

### 3. Mathematical Induction

3. MATHEMATICAL INDUCTION 83 3. Mathematical Induction 3.1. First Principle of Mathematical Induction. Let P (n) be a predicate with domain of discourse (over) the natural numbers N = {0, 1,,...}. If (1)

### FACTORING IN QUADRATIC FIELDS. 1. Introduction. This is called a quadratic field and it has degree 2 over Q. Similarly, set

FACTORING IN QUADRATIC FIELDS KEITH CONRAD For a squarefree integer d other than 1, let 1. Introduction K = Q[ d] = {x + y d : x, y Q}. This is called a quadratic field and it has degree 2 over Q. Similarly,

### APPLICATIONS OF THE ORDER FUNCTION

APPLICATIONS OF THE ORDER FUNCTION LECTURE NOTES: MATH 432, CSUSM, SPRING 2009. PROF. WAYNE AITKEN In this lecture we will explore several applications of order functions including formulas for GCDs and

### CLASS 3, GIVEN ON 9/27/2010, FOR MATH 25, FALL 2010

CLASS 3, GIVEN ON 9/27/2010, FOR MATH 25, FALL 2010 1. Greatest common divisor Suppose a, b are two integers. If another integer d satisfies d a, d b, we call d a common divisor of a, b. Notice that as

### Notes on Factoring. MA 206 Kurt Bryan

The General Approach Notes on Factoring MA 26 Kurt Bryan Suppose I hand you n, a 2 digit integer and tell you that n is composite, with smallest prime factor around 5 digits. Finding a nontrivial factor

### a = bq + r where 0 r < b.

Lecture 5: Euclid s algorithm Introduction The fundamental arithmetic operations are addition, subtraction, multiplication and division. But there is a fifth operation which I would argue is just as fundamental

### The Prime Numbers. Definition. A prime number is a positive integer with exactly two positive divisors.

The Prime Numbers Before starting our study of primes, we record the following important lemma. Recall that integers a, b are said to be relatively prime if gcd(a, b) = 1. Lemma (Euclid s Lemma). If gcd(a,

### Irreducibility criteria for compositions and multiplicative convolutions of polynomials with integer coefficients

DOI: 10.2478/auom-2014-0007 An. Şt. Univ. Ovidius Constanţa Vol. 221),2014, 73 84 Irreducibility criteria for compositions and multiplicative convolutions of polynomials with integer coefficients Anca

### MOP 2007 Black Group Integer Polynomials Yufei Zhao. Integer Polynomials. June 29, 2007 Yufei Zhao yufeiz@mit.edu

Integer Polynomials June 9, 007 Yufei Zhao yufeiz@mit.edu We will use Z[x] to denote the ring of polynomials with integer coefficients. We begin by summarizing some of the common approaches used in dealing

### I. GROUPS: BASIC DEFINITIONS AND EXAMPLES

I GROUPS: BASIC DEFINITIONS AND EXAMPLES Definition 1: An operation on a set G is a function : G G G Definition 2: A group is a set G which is equipped with an operation and a special element e G, called

### Factoring & Primality

Factoring & Primality Lecturer: Dimitris Papadopoulos In this lecture we will discuss the problem of integer factorization and primality testing, two problems that have been the focus of a great amount

### U.C. Berkeley CS276: Cryptography Handout 0.1 Luca Trevisan January, 2009. Notes on Algebra

U.C. Berkeley CS276: Cryptography Handout 0.1 Luca Trevisan January, 2009 Notes on Algebra These notes contain as little theory as possible, and most results are stated without proof. Any introductory

### Elementary Number Theory and Methods of Proof. CSE 215, Foundations of Computer Science Stony Brook University http://www.cs.stonybrook.

Elementary Number Theory and Methods of Proof CSE 215, Foundations of Computer Science Stony Brook University http://www.cs.stonybrook.edu/~cse215 1 Number theory Properties: 2 Properties of integers (whole

### The Ideal Class Group

Chapter 5 The Ideal Class Group We will use Minkowski theory, which belongs to the general area of geometry of numbers, to gain insight into the ideal class group of a number field. We have already mentioned

### 1 Sets and Set Notation.

LINEAR ALGEBRA MATH 27.6 SPRING 23 (COHEN) LECTURE NOTES Sets and Set Notation. Definition (Naive Definition of a Set). A set is any collection of objects, called the elements of that set. We will most

### ON UNIQUE FACTORIZATION DOMAINS

ON UNIQUE FACTORIZATION DOMAINS JIM COYKENDALL AND WILLIAM W. SMITH Abstract. In this paper we attempt to generalize the notion of unique factorization domain in the spirit of half-factorial domain. It

### Integer roots of quadratic and cubic polynomials with integer coefficients

Integer roots of quadratic and cubic polynomials with integer coefficients Konstantine Zelator Mathematics, Computer Science and Statistics 212 Ben Franklin Hall Bloomsburg University 400 East Second Street

### 1 = (a 0 + b 0 α) 2 + + (a m 1 + b m 1 α) 2. for certain elements a 0,..., a m 1, b 0,..., b m 1 of F. Multiplying out, we obtain

Notes on real-closed fields These notes develop the algebraic background needed to understand the model theory of real-closed fields. To understand these notes, a standard graduate course in algebra is

### Lecture 1: Elementary Number Theory

Lecture 1: Elementary Number Theory The integers are the simplest and most fundamental objects in discrete mathematics. All calculations by computers are based on the arithmetical operations with integers

### CONTINUED FRACTIONS AND FACTORING. Niels Lauritzen

CONTINUED FRACTIONS AND FACTORING Niels Lauritzen ii NIELS LAURITZEN DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES UNIVERSITY OF AARHUS, DENMARK EMAIL: niels@imf.au.dk URL: http://home.imf.au.dk/niels/ Contents

### 1 Die hard, once and for all

ENGG 2440A: Discrete Mathematics for Engineers Lecture 4 The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Fall 2014 6 and 7 October 2014 Number theory is the branch of mathematics that studies properties of the integers.

### RESULTANT AND DISCRIMINANT OF POLYNOMIALS

RESULTANT AND DISCRIMINANT OF POLYNOMIALS SVANTE JANSON Abstract. This is a collection of classical results about resultants and discriminants for polynomials, compiled mainly for my own use. All results

### The determinant of a skew-symmetric matrix is a square. This can be seen in small cases by direct calculation: 0 a. 12 a. a 13 a 24 a 14 a 23 a 14

4 Symplectic groups In this and the next two sections, we begin the study of the groups preserving reflexive sesquilinear forms or quadratic forms. We begin with the symplectic groups, associated with

### COMMUTATIVE RINGS. Definition: A domain is a commutative ring R that satisfies the cancellation law for multiplication:

COMMUTATIVE RINGS Definition: A commutative ring R is a set with two operations, addition and multiplication, such that: (i) R is an abelian group under addition; (ii) ab = ba for all a, b R (commutative

### MATH 289 PROBLEM SET 4: NUMBER THEORY

MATH 289 PROBLEM SET 4: NUMBER THEORY 1. The greatest common divisor If d and n are integers, then we say that d divides n if and only if there exists an integer q such that n = qd. Notice that if d divides

### MA257: INTRODUCTION TO NUMBER THEORY LECTURE NOTES

MA257: INTRODUCTION TO NUMBER THEORY LECTURE NOTES 2016 47 4. Diophantine Equations A Diophantine Equation is simply an equation in one or more variables for which integer (or sometimes rational) solutions

### Lecture 14: Section 3.3

Lecture 14: Section 3.3 Shuanglin Shao October 23, 2013 Definition. Two nonzero vectors u and v in R n are said to be orthogonal (or perpendicular) if u v = 0. We will also agree that the zero vector in

### Computing divisors and common multiples of quasi-linear ordinary differential equations

Computing divisors and common multiples of quasi-linear ordinary differential equations Dima Grigoriev CNRS, Mathématiques, Université de Lille Villeneuve d Ascq, 59655, France Dmitry.Grigoryev@math.univ-lille1.fr

### Ideal Class Group and Units

Chapter 4 Ideal Class Group and Units We are now interested in understanding two aspects of ring of integers of number fields: how principal they are (that is, what is the proportion of principal ideals

### ADDITIVE GROUPS OF RINGS WITH IDENTITY

ADDITIVE GROUPS OF RINGS WITH IDENTITY SIMION BREAZ AND GRIGORE CĂLUGĂREANU Abstract. A ring with identity exists on a torsion Abelian group exactly when the group is bounded. The additive groups of torsion-free

### MA651 Topology. Lecture 6. Separation Axioms.

MA651 Topology. Lecture 6. Separation Axioms. This text is based on the following books: Fundamental concepts of topology by Peter O Neil Elements of Mathematics: General Topology by Nicolas Bourbaki Counterexamples

### WHAT ARE MATHEMATICAL PROOFS AND WHY THEY ARE IMPORTANT?

WHAT ARE MATHEMATICAL PROOFS AND WHY THEY ARE IMPORTANT? introduction Many students seem to have trouble with the notion of a mathematical proof. People that come to a course like Math 216, who certainly

### 4.5 Linear Dependence and Linear Independence

4.5 Linear Dependence and Linear Independence 267 32. {v 1, v 2 }, where v 1, v 2 are collinear vectors in R 3. 33. Prove that if S and S are subsets of a vector space V such that S is a subset of S, then

### Algebraic Systems, Fall 2013, September 1, 2013 Edition. Todd Cochrane

Algebraic Systems, Fall 2013, September 1, 2013 Edition Todd Cochrane Contents Notation 5 Chapter 0. Axioms for the set of Integers Z. 7 Chapter 1. Algebraic Properties of the Integers 9 1.1. Background

### Cyclotomic Extensions

Chapter 7 Cyclotomic Extensions A cyclotomic extension Q(ζ n ) of the rationals is formed by adjoining a primitive n th root of unity ζ n. In this chapter, we will find an integral basis and calculate

### Modern Algebra Lecture Notes: Rings and fields set 4 (Revision 2)

Modern Algebra Lecture Notes: Rings and fields set 4 (Revision 2) Kevin Broughan University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand May 13, 2010 Remainder and Factor Theorem 15 Definition of factor If f (x)

### GROUPS ACTING ON A SET

GROUPS ACTING ON A SET MATH 435 SPRING 2012 NOTES FROM FEBRUARY 27TH, 2012 1. Left group actions Definition 1.1. Suppose that G is a group and S is a set. A left (group) action of G on S is a rule for

### THE FUNDAMENTAL THEOREM OF ARBITRAGE PRICING

THE FUNDAMENTAL THEOREM OF ARBITRAGE PRICING 1. Introduction The Black-Scholes theory, which is the main subject of this course and its sequel, is based on the Efficient Market Hypothesis, that arbitrages

### Algebra for Digital Communication

EPFL - Section de Mathématiques Algebra for Digital Communication Fall semester 2008 Solutions for exercise sheet 1 Exercise 1. i) We will do a proof by contradiction. Suppose 2 a 2 but 2 a. We will obtain

### Math 4310 Handout - Quotient Vector Spaces

Math 4310 Handout - Quotient Vector Spaces Dan Collins The textbook defines a subspace of a vector space in Chapter 4, but it avoids ever discussing the notion of a quotient space. This is understandable

### = 2 + 1 2 2 = 3 4, Now assume that P (k) is true for some fixed k 2. This means that

Instructions. Answer each of the questions on your own paper, and be sure to show your work so that partial credit can be adequately assessed. Credit will not be given for answers (even correct ones) without

### THE DIMENSION OF A VECTOR SPACE

THE DIMENSION OF A VECTOR SPACE KEITH CONRAD This handout is a supplementary discussion leading up to the definition of dimension and some of its basic properties. Let V be a vector space over a field

### THE SEARCH FOR NATURAL DEFINABILITY IN THE TURING DEGREES

THE SEARCH FOR NATURAL DEFINABILITY IN THE TURING DEGREES ANDREW E.M. LEWIS 1. Introduction This will be a course on the Turing degrees. We shall assume very little background knowledge: familiarity with

### Review for Final Exam

Review for Final Exam Note: Warning, this is probably not exhaustive and probably does contain typos (which I d like to hear about), but represents a review of most of the material covered in Chapters

### JUST THE MATHS UNIT NUMBER 1.8. ALGEBRA 8 (Polynomials) A.J.Hobson

JUST THE MATHS UNIT NUMBER 1.8 ALGEBRA 8 (Polynomials) by A.J.Hobson 1.8.1 The factor theorem 1.8.2 Application to quadratic and cubic expressions 1.8.3 Cubic equations 1.8.4 Long division of polynomials

### 12 Greatest Common Divisors. The Euclidean Algorithm

Arkansas Tech University MATH 4033: Elementary Modern Algebra Dr. Marcel B. Finan 12 Greatest Common Divisors. The Euclidean Algorithm As mentioned at the end of the previous section, we would like to

### Linear Algebra. A vector space (over R) is an ordered quadruple. such that V is a set; 0 V ; and the following eight axioms hold:

Linear Algebra A vector space (over R) is an ordered quadruple (V, 0, α, µ) such that V is a set; 0 V ; and the following eight axioms hold: α : V V V and µ : R V V ; (i) α(α(u, v), w) = α(u, α(v, w)),

### Factoring of Prime Ideals in Extensions

Chapter 4 Factoring of Prime Ideals in Extensions 4. Lifting of Prime Ideals Recall the basic AKLB setup: A is a Dedekind domain with fraction field K, L is a finite, separable extension of K of degree

### 18.4. Errors and Percentage Change. Introduction. Prerequisites. Learning Outcomes

Errors and Percentage Change 18.4 Introduction When one variable is related to several others by a functional relationship it is possible to estimate the percentage change in that variable caused by given

### Finite Fields and Error-Correcting Codes

Lecture Notes in Mathematics Finite Fields and Error-Correcting Codes Karl-Gustav Andersson (Lund University) (version 1.013-16 September 2015) Translated from Swedish by Sigmundur Gudmundsson Contents

### Discrete Mathematics Lecture 3 Elementary Number Theory and Methods of Proof. Harper Langston New York University

Discrete Mathematics Lecture 3 Elementary Number Theory and Methods of Proof Harper Langston New York University Proof and Counterexample Discovery and proof Even and odd numbers number n from Z is called