1.1Fields
In we can add, subtract, multiply, and divide by any nonzero number. In we can add two vectors and scale a vector by a real number, but there is no useful way to multiply or divide two vectors. Linear algebra keeps these roles apart. Vectors only need to be added and scaled, while the numbers that do the scaling, the scalars, need the full arithmetic of . Before we define vector spaces in Section 1.2, this section makes “full arithmetic” precise. The resulting notion, a field, is all we will ever ask of our scalars, so the theory applies verbatim over , , , and number systems as unfamiliar as , where .
1.1.1The field axioms
Intuition (What we need from scalars). The basic computational problem of linear algebra is solving systems of linear equations. Take the smallest case: one equation in one unknown, with . Over we subtract and divide by without a second thought. Spelled out, subtracting means adding to both sides and simplifying the left side with
and dividing by means multiplying by and simplifying with
Gauss–Jordan elimination (Section 3.3) solves systems of any size with the same moves: it adds a multiple of one equation to another and divides by nonzero pivots. So we want two operations that can be undone, that can be regrouped and reordered freely, that have neutral elements and , and that are linked by distributivity, so that multiplying a sum means multiplying each term. The field axioms are exactly this list.
Definition 1.1.1 (Field). A field is a set together with two operations, addition and multiplication , that satisfy the following field axioms.
- Commutativity. For all , and .
- Associativity. For all ,
and . - Distributivity. For all ,
. - Additive identity. There is an element such that for all .
- Multiplicative identity. There is an element with such that for all .
- Additive inverses. For every there is some with .
- Multiplicative inverses. For every with there is some with .
The elements of are called scalars. We write for .
Remark 1.1.2. Since and are functions , sums and products of elements of lie in . When we check that a candidate set is a field, this closure has to be checked along with the axioms.
We stated the identity, inverse, and distributive axioms on one side only. Commutativity supplies the other side: , , and for the inverses above, and
We use these mirrored forms freely and cite them by the axiom they come from.
Finally, read the quantifiers carefully. The identity axioms say that some element satisfies for every , and similarly for . The axioms after them then refer to “” and “” as if these were determined. If a field could contain two different additive identities, the condition would be ambiguous. Theorem 1.1.9 shows that this cannot happen, and the proof of its part (a) uses only commutativity and the identity axioms, so the argument is not circular.
Example 1.1.4 (The field with two elements). Let , with
These are the parity rules for integers if we read as “even” and as “odd”: odd plus odd is even, odd times odd is odd, and so on. Both operations are commutative by inspection, and are identities with , the additive inverse of is and that of is (as ), and is its own multiplicative inverse. Associativity and distributivity can be checked case by case, or deduced from Lemma 1.1.21 below, since is .
So a field’s arithmetic can look quite unlike that of . An argument about general fields that silently assumes is not valid in .
Non-example 1.1.6 (Componentwise multiplication on ). Give the componentwise operations
Every axiom except multiplicative inverses holds, because each holds in each coordinate separately; the identities are and . But has no inverse, since
Intuition (What each axiom is for). Here is what goes wrong when one axiom is dropped.
- Without multiplicative inverses we cannot divide by pivots. In , the equation has no solution.
- Without additive inverses we cannot subtract one equation from another. In , the equation has no solution.
- Without associativity, multiplying by gives , and we could not regroup the left side as .
- Without commutativity of multiplication, and are different equations. Square matrices multiply like this (Section 2.4).
- Without distributivity, nothing links to , since it is the only axiom that mentions both. Even (Proposition 1.1.15) can fail: Exercise 1.1.55 builds a structure satisfying every other axiom in which .
- Without , the one-element set with would be a field. It would also be the only new example, since forces (Exercise 1.1.39).
1.1.2Consequences of the axioms
From now on, denotes a field. All we know about is the axioms, so facts that are second nature in , such as and , need proofs. In exchange, each such proof establishes the fact in every field at once.
Technique 1.1.7 (Proving from axioms). When objects are defined by axioms, as fields are here and vector spaces will be in Section 1.2, the only facts available are the axioms and what has already been proved from them. A fact that is obvious for real numbers is not available until it is proved, because a general field need not look like .
The move is to write the argument as a chain of equalities that changes one thing at a time, and to justify each link by the axiom or earlier result it uses. Watch for steps that move a term past another (commutativity) or regroup (associativity): in we make these without noticing.
Reach for it whenever the hypotheses are an axiom system and the claim is an identity or an elementary property. If you are stuck, ask which axioms can connect the objects in the claim. For example, distributivity is the only axiom that involves both and , so any fact relating (an additive object) to multiplication must go through it. The canonical example is (Proposition 1.1.15).
Used in 29 places and 1 practice exercise
Theorem 1.1.9, Proposition 1.1.13, Proposition 1.1.15, Proposition 1.1.16, Proposition 1.1.17, Proposition 1.1.30, Proposition 1.1.33, Exercise 1.1.38, Exercise 1.1.39, Exercise 1.1.58, Proposition 1.2.5, Proposition 1.2.10, Proposition 1.2.22, Proposition 1.2.27, Proposition 1.2.28, Proposition 1.2.30, Proposition 1.2.32, Proposition 1.2.33, Proposition 1.2.34, Proposition 1.2.35, Exercise 1.2.54, Exercise 1.2.55, Exercise 1.2.56, Exercise 1.7.14, Problem 1.2, Lemma 2.1.22, Proposition 4.6.2, Theorem 4.6.22, Proposition 6.1.4; 1 practice exercise.
Uniqueness
The identity and inverse axioms assert that certain elements exist, not that they are unique. Uniqueness is what entitles us to speak of the zero of and the inverse of .
Technique 1.1.8 (Uniqueness via two candidates). To show that at most one object has a property , suppose and both have and prove . Usually one evaluates a single well-chosen expression in two ways, once using that has and once using that has .
Reach for it whenever a claim says “the”, “unique”, or “exactly one”. Existence and uniqueness are separate claims: prove existence by producing an object, and uniqueness by this technique. The canonical example is the uniqueness of in Theorem 1.1.9, where the expression is .
Used in 67 places and 5 practice exercises
Theorem 1.1.9, Exercise 1.1.11, Corollary 1.1.14, Proposition 1.1.16, Exercise 1.1.37, Exercise 1.1.46, Exercise 1.1.47, Proposition 1.2.27, Proposition 1.2.28, Proposition 1.2.30, Proposition 1.2.34, Exercise 1.2.43, Exercise 1.2.52, Proposition 1.6.16, Exercise 1.7.6, Exercise 1.7.7, Exercise 1.7.11, Problem 1.3, Problem 1.17, Proposition 2.1.4, Theorem 2.2.1, Proposition 2.3.10, Proposition 2.3.17, Proposition 2.4.3, Theorem 2.5.10, Exercise 2.5.37, Exercise 2.5.49, Exercise 2.6.42, Exercise 2.6.43, Exercise 2.6.49, Theorem 3.3.17, Corollary 3.3.18, Proposition 3.4.27, Problem 3.2, Problem 3.17, Exercise 4.3.44, Proposition 4.4.31, Proposition 4.5.16, Proposition 4.6.7, Theorem 4.6.30, Exercise 4.6.39, Exercise 4.6.54, Theorem 4.7.22, Proposition 4.7.32, Proposition 5.2.5, Proposition 5.3.17, Theorem 6.4.6, Theorem 6.4.24, Theorem 6.4.38, Proposition 6.5.27, Theorem 6.6.3, Proposition 6.6.9, Exercise 6.6.37, Theorem 7.1.14, Corollary 7.1.17, Proposition 7.1.29, Theorem 7.1.45, Exercise 7.1.51, Exercise 7.1.58, Theorem 7.6.2, Notation 8.3.10, Theorem 8.3.23, Theorem A.1.14, Proposition A.2.4, Exercise A.2.9, Theorem A.3.10, Proposition B.1.2; 5 practice exercises.
Theorem 1.1.9 (Uniqueness of identities and inverses). Let be a field.
- (a) has exactly one additive identity and exactly one multiplicative identity.
- (b)Every has exactly one additive inverse, and every nonzero has exactly one multiplicative inverse.
Uses. Definition 1.1.1 (Field)
Techniques. Uniqueness via two candidates (Technique 1.1.8), Proving from axioms (Technique 1.1.7)
(a) Suppose and both satisfy the additive identity axiom. Then
The same argument, with and in place of and and multiplication in place of addition, shows that the multiplicative identity is unique. Realize that we used only commutativity and the identity axioms. So from here on “” and “” are unambiguous, and the remaining axioms say what they were meant to say.
(b) Let , and suppose and . Then
as desired. If and , the same chain with multiplication in place of addition and in place of gives . □
Notation 1.1.10. By Theorem 1.1.9 we may write for the additive inverse of , and for the multiplicative inverse of . Subtraction and division are defined by
For a positive integer , is the product of copies of , and .
Uses. Theorem 1.1.9 (Uniqueness of identities and inverses), Definition 1.1.1 (Field)
Techniques. Uniqueness via two candidates (Technique 1.1.8)
Since by the additive identity axiom, is an additive inverse of , so by Theorem 1.1.9.
For the second claim,
So is an additive inverse of , and by Theorem 1.1.9 it equals .
Arithmetic in a field
We now return to the problem that motivated the definition.
Proposition 1.1.13 (Solving and ). Let .
- (a)The equation has exactly one solution , namely .
- (b)If , the equation has exactly one solution , namely .
Uses. Definition 1.1.1 (Field), Notation 1.1.10
Techniques. Proving from axioms (Technique 1.1.7)
(a) First, is a solution:
Conversely, suppose . Then
so is the only solution.
(b) Suppose , so that exists. Then is a solution, since by commutativity, associativity, and the inverse and identity axioms,
Conversely, if , the same axioms give
so is the only solution. □
Part (b) is what the section set out to guarantee: in any field, a linear equation in one unknown with a nonzero coefficient has exactly one solution. The uniqueness half is often used in the following form.
Uses. Proposition 1.1.13 (Solving and )
Techniques. Uniqueness via two candidates (Technique 1.1.8)
Uses. Definition 1.1.1 (Field), Corollary 1.1.14 (Cancellation)
Techniques. Proving from axioms (Technique 1.1.7)
Let . Then
Cancelling from both sides (Corollary 1.1.14) gives . By commutativity, . □
The proof converted the additive fact into the multiplicative fact . The same trick shows that for vectors in Section 1.2.
Proposition 1.1.16 (Sign rules). For all :
- (a);
- (b);
- (c)
; - (d).
Uses. Theorem 1.1.9 (Uniqueness of identities and inverses), Proposition 1.1.15 (Multiplying by zero), Definition 1.1.1 (Field)
Techniques. Uniqueness via two candidates (Technique 1.1.8), Proving from axioms (Technique 1.1.7)
(a) Since
(b) We compute
where the last step is Proposition 1.1.15. So is an additive inverse of , and by Theorem 1.1.9.
(c) By (b), associativity, and (b) again,
(d) By (c) twice and then (a),
In particular , and
Uses. Definition 1.1.1 (Field), Proposition 1.1.15 (Multiplying by zero)
Techniques. Proving from axioms (Technique 1.1.7)
Suppose . If we are done, so suppose . Then exists, and
where the last step is Proposition 1.1.15. So or . □
The integers also have no zero divisors, so this property alone does not make a field. In Section 1.1.3 we meet number systems that have zero divisors, and there the uniqueness in part (b) of Proposition 1.1.13 fails.
Uses. Proposition 1.1.17 (No zero divisors), Proposition 1.1.16 (Sign rules), Proposition 1.1.13 (Solving and )
1.1.3The fields
is the first of an infinite family of finite fields, built from arithmetic with remainders.
Definition 1.1.19 (Integers modulo ). Let be an integer. For , write for the remainder of on division by , that is, the unique such that . The integers modulo are the set
This is clock arithmetic: in , and . Outside of proofs we drop the subscripts and write and , once it is clear which we work with.
All the field axioms except multiplicative inverses hold in for every . Structures like this are common enough to have a name.
So every field is a commutative ring. The integers and componentwise (Non-example 1.1.6) are commutative rings that are not fields, and so are polynomials with coefficients in a field (Section 7.1).
Lemma 1.1.21 (Arithmetic in ). Let .
- (a)For all ,
and . - (b) is a commutative ring with identities and . The additive inverse of is .
Uses. Definition 1.1.19 (Integers modulo ), Definition 1.1.20 (Commutative ring), the division algorithm: if and only if
Throughout we use the fact, from the division algorithm, that if and only if . In particular for every .
(a) Let , and write and . Then
is a sum of multiples of , so
is a multiple of , so
(b) Every element of is its own remainder, , so (a) applies to elements of directly. Let . For associativity of addition, (a) gives
and likewise
Next, and , and because . Finally, , and for the integer lies in and
Compare the multiplication tables of and .
Proof (via Bézout’s identity).
Uses. Lemma 1.1.21 (Arithmetic in ), Proposition 1.1.17 (No zero divisors), Bézout’s identity: if , then for some
By Lemma 1.1.21, satisfies every field axiom except possibly the existence of multiplicative inverses. So it is a field if and only if every nonzero element has a multiplicative inverse.
() We prove the contrapositive. Suppose is not prime. Since , we can write with integers . Then and are nonzero elements of with . A field has no zero divisors (Proposition 1.1.17), so is not a field.
() Suppose is prime, and let . The only positive divisors of are and , and because , so . By Bézout’s identity there are integers with . Let . By part (a) of Lemma 1.1.21,
where the last step holds because and differ by a multiple of . So is a multiplicative inverse of , as desired. □
Proof (by counting).
Uses. Lemma 1.1.21 (Arithmetic in ), Proposition 1.1.17 (No zero divisors), Euclid’s lemma: if is prime and , then or , an injective function from a finite set to itself is surjective
The direction () is proved as in the first proof. For (), let be prime and , and define by . We will show that is injective. Suppose , that is,
So is an injective function from the finite set to itself. Its image then has elements, so it is all of , and in particular for some . That is, is a multiplicative inverse of . □
The two proofs differ in what they produce. The first computes , and running the Euclidean algorithm to find Bézout’s is how one inverts elements of in practice. The second only proves that exists, but it uses just two facts about : it is finite, and with forces . On a finite set, a function to itself is injective if and only if it is surjective, so a multiplication that can be cancelled can also be undone. The same principle returns in Section 4.2 with dimension in place of the number of elements: a linear map from a finite-dimensional space to itself is injective if and only if it is surjective.
Uses. Proposition 1.1.24 ( is a field if and only if is prime), Proposition 1.1.13 (Solving and )
Since , , and , the inverses are
For the equation, holds if and only if , which holds if and only if
Aside (Characteristic). In , adding to itself times gives , while in , , and no number of ′s adds up to . For a positive integer and , write for ( terms). This is repeated addition, not multiplication by an element of .
So and
The case that matters most later is characteristic , where . There for every , and we cannot divide by . Some later arguments do divide by : the converse of “alternating implies antisymmetric” for determinants (Section 5.1), and the passage between quadratic forms and symmetric matrices (Section 12.2). Those results assume , and is where to look for counterexamples when the assumption is dropped.
1.1.4The complex numbers
Componentwise multiplication does not make a field (Non-example 1.1.6), but a different multiplication does. We give only what the next few chapters need: the definition and the field axioms. Conjugation, the modulus, polar form, and roots of unity are developed in Section B.1.
Definition 1.1.29 (Complex numbers). The complex numbers are the set , whose element we write as , with the operations
The real part of is and its imaginary part is . We identify the real number with , and write for and for .
Intuition. The multiplication rule is forced. Suppose we want a field that contains and an element with . Then the field axioms leave no choice:
So the definition is the only candidate, and what remains is to check that it satisfies the axioms. In particular
The identification of with respects the operations:
Proposition 1.1.30 ( is a field). is a field, with identities and . The additive inverse of is , and if , then
Proof, part 1 of 2: the algebraic laws.
Uses. Definition 1.1.29 (Complex numbers), the field axioms of
Techniques. Proving from axioms (Technique 1.1.7)
Let , , and , where
For commutativity of multiplication,
and
so . For distributivity,
Intuition. The remaining axioms ask for identities and inverses, and only the multiplicative inverse needs an idea. For , multiplying by produces a real number,
and a nonzero real number can be divided by. Dividing by gives the inverse in the statement.
Proof, part 2 of 2: identities and inverses.
Uses. Definition 1.1.29 (Complex numbers), for real
For we have and
Now suppose , that is, . Then , since squares of real numbers are nonnegative and at least one of and is positive. Let
so is a multiplicative inverse of . □
From now on we compute in with the field axioms and , as in the intuition above; the product formula never needs to be memorized.
Example 1.1.31 (Complex arithmetic).
The number in the proof is the complex conjugate of , and is the modulus of . Both reappear in Chapter 6, where inner products over need them.
1.1.5Subfields
The operations of , restricted to the real numbers , are the operations of , and the operations of restricted to are those of . Fields sitting inside other fields like this come up whenever we compare the same vectors over two fields, for instance over and over (Section 1.5).
Uses. Definition 1.1.32 (Subfield), Definition 1.1.1 (Field)
Techniques. Proving from axioms (Technique 1.1.7)
Exercises
Exercise 1.1.35. Solve the system
(a) over , and (b) over , reading each integer as its remainder modulo .
Uses. Proposition 1.1.24 ( is a field if and only if is prime), Proposition 1.1.13 (Solving and )
(a) We work in , where since . Suppose is a solution. Subtracting times the first equation from the second gives
In , , so by Proposition 1.1.16, and . The first equation then gives . So is the only possible solution, and it is one: in , and .
(b) In we have and , so the system reads , . Its solutions are and . The elimination in (a) is unavailable here, because it divided by , which is in .
Uses. Proposition 1.1.30 ( is a field)
Uses. Theorem 1.1.9 (Uniqueness of identities and inverses), Proposition 1.1.15 (Multiplying by zero), Proposition 1.1.17 (No zero divisors)
Techniques. Uniqueness via two candidates (Technique 1.1.8)
If , then by Proposition 1.1.15, contradicting . So , and has a multiplicative inverse. Since , the element is a multiplicative inverse of , so by Theorem 1.1.9.
By Proposition 1.1.17, . Reordering the product,
so is a multiplicative inverse of , and by Theorem 1.1.9.
Exercise 1.1.38. Let with and . Show that
and that if and only if .
Uses. Notation 1.1.10, Exercise 1.1.37, Definition 1.1.1 (Field)
Techniques. Proving from axioms (Technique 1.1.7)
By Exercise 1.1.37, and . Using distributivity and reordering products,
Similarly,
For the last claim, suppose . Multiplying both sides by gives
Uses. Proposition 1.1.15 (Multiplying by zero)
Techniques. Proving from axioms (Technique 1.1.7)
The set is nonempty because it contains . The proof of Proposition 1.1.15 used distributivity, the additive identity axiom, and additive cancellation, which in turn rests only on the additive axioms; none of these involve . So for every . Now for every ,
using the multiplicative identity axiom and . Hence .
Uses. Proposition 1.1.16 (Sign rules), Proposition 1.1.17 (No zero divisors)
The claim is true. Expanding with distributivity and Proposition 1.1.16,
since
In we have , so the conclusion just says . That is consistent: and are different.
Uses. Definition 1.1.19 (Integers modulo )
The claim is false. In ,
so has no solution. (It does for some primes: in , and or in .)
Exercise 1.1.42. Find the error in the following argument.
Claim. In every field, the equation has exactly two solutions.
Proof. We have
Uses. Proposition 1.1.17 (No zero divisors), Example 1.1.4 (The field with two elements)
Uses. Proposition 1.1.13 (Solving and ), Proposition 1.1.15 (Multiplying by zero)
Suppose , and let . By part (a) of Proposition 1.1.13, applied with unknown , the equation holds if and only if , and by part (b) this holds if and only if . So every has exactly one preimage, that is, is a bijection, and
Suppose . Then for every , by Proposition 1.1.15. In particular , and , so is not injective.
- (a)Show that the only complex numbers with are and .
- (b)Find all with .
Uses. Proposition 1.1.17 (No zero divisors), Proposition 1.1.30 ( is a field), Exercise 1.1.40
(a) Since , we have
(b) Write with . Then
and both work:
Once one square root of is known, (a)‘s method finds all of them: means , so .
Exercise 1.1.45. Find the error in the following argument.
Claim. is a field for every .
Proof. By Lemma 1.1.21, only multiplicative inverses need checking. Let in , and define . If , then , so by cancellation (Corollary 1.1.14). So is an injective function from a finite set to itself, hence surjective, and for some .
Uses. Corollary 1.1.14 (Cancellation), Non-example 1.1.23 (), Proposition 1.1.24 ( is a field if and only if is prime)
(a)Let be a field with exactly three elements, . Show that
Conclude that the addition and multiplication tables of are those of with in place of .
- (b)Find all fields in which for every .
Uses. Corollary 1.1.14 (Cancellation), Theorem 1.1.9 (Uniqueness of identities and inverses), Proposition 1.1.15 (Multiplying by zero), Proposition 1.1.17 (No zero divisors), Exercise 1.1.40
Techniques. Uniqueness via two candidates (Technique 1.1.8)
(a) Sums involving , and products involving or , are determined by the identity axioms and Proposition 1.1.15, so we need , , , and . Throughout, , , are distinct.
. If , then by cancellation, which is false. Suppose . If , then ; if , then ; both are false, so . But then and are both additive inverses of , so by Theorem 1.1.9, which is false. Hence .
. As above, forces and forces . So , and in particular .
. If , then . If , then , but , so . Both are false, so .
. If , then by Proposition 1.1.17. If , then by cancellation (as ). So .
In , , , , and . So the tables of are those of with in place of .
(b) Suppose for all . As in Exercise 1.1.40,
If , then and . In a field with two elements every sum and product is forced as above, with because would give ; so has the tables of . If , then , and , so has exactly three elements, and by (a) has the tables of (with in place of ).
Conversely, holds in (, ) and in (). So the fields with for all are exactly and , up to renaming the elements.
Exercise 1.1.47. Show that the following are equivalent for a field :
- (i);
- (ii) for every ;
- (iii)the map , , is injective.
Uses. Proposition 1.1.15 (Multiplying by zero), Proposition 1.1.16 (Sign rules), Theorem 1.1.9 (Uniqueness of identities and inverses), Exercise 1.1.40
Techniques. Uniqueness via two candidates (Technique 1.1.8)
We prove (i) (ii) (iii) (i).
(i) (ii). Let . By distributivity and Proposition 1.1.15,
(ii) (iii). Suppose . By Exercise 1.1.40, or , and by (ii). So .
(iii) (i). By Proposition 1.1.16, . Injectivity gives , so .
Uses. Definition 1.1.28 (Characteristic), Proposition 1.1.17 (No zero divisors)
First, for positive integers and , distributivity gives
where there are terms in the middle expressions, and the last sum consists of ones.
Suppose . Then , since . Suppose for contradiction that is not prime, so with . Then
Uses. Definition 1.1.32 (Subfield), is irrational
Write . Clearly and lie in . For ,
and these lie in because is closed under its operations.
Now let . We claim . If , then , so . If and , then , so would be rational, which is false. Hence is a nonzero rational, and
So
Exercise 1.1.50. Let be a field with . Write and , and let with .
- (a)Show that has a solution if and only if for some , and that in that case the solutions are .
- (b)Show that (a) fails without the hypothesis : find with such that is a square but has no root in .
Uses. Proposition 1.1.17 (No zero divisors), Proposition 1.1.13 (Solving and ), Exercise 1.1.40
(a) Since and , Proposition 1.1.17 gives and . Expanding,
Because , a product is exactly when . So is a solution if and only if
If is a solution, then satisfies . Conversely, suppose . If is a solution, then , so or (Exercise 1.1.40), and solving for (Proposition 1.1.13) gives or . Both of these are solutions, since for them
(b) Take . In , , so is a square. But and , so has no root in . The proof of (a) breaks at the first step, which multiplies by .
Exercise 1.1.51. Let be prime and let be nonzero.
- (a)Show that the products
are the elements of in some order. - (b)Deduce that in . (This is Fermat’s little theorem.)
Uses. Proposition 1.1.24 ( is a field if and only if is prime), Proposition 1.1.17 (No zero divisors), Corollary 1.1.14 (Cancellation)
By Proposition 1.1.24, is a field.
(a) Each product with is nonzero by Proposition 1.1.17. If , then by Corollary 1.1.14, which applies because in a field. So the products are distinct elements of the -element set , hence all of it.
(b) Let , which is nonzero by Proposition 1.1.17. By (a), the product of is the product of in another order, which is . Reordering factors, the same product is . So , and cancelling (Corollary 1.1.14) gives .
Contrast this use of cancellation with Exercise 1.1.45: here we already know that is a field.
Uses. Exercise 1.1.40, Proposition 1.1.17 (No zero divisors), Proposition 1.1.24 ( is a field if and only if is prime)
There are squares.
First, for : otherwise , so by Proposition 1.1.17, but in because is odd. So the nonzero elements split into disjoint pairs .
By Exercise 1.1.40, two nonzero elements have the same square if and only if they lie in the same pair. Also for by Proposition 1.1.17. So the nonzero squares are in bijection with the pairs, and there are of them. Adding the square gives .
For example, the squares in are , , , and , which is elements.
Uses. Definition 1.1.32 (Subfield), is irrational
The claim is false: is not closed under multiplication. Write , so and . We will show that .
First, is irrational. If with integers , , and , then , so is even. Writing gives , so and is even too, a contradiction.
Suppose with . Multiplying by ,
If , then
Exercise 1.1.54. Fix and give the componentwise addition and the multiplication
(For this is .) For which is with these operations a field?
Uses. Proposition 1.1.30 ( is a field), Proposition 1.1.17 (No zero divisors), Definition 1.1.20 (Commutative ring)
The answer is: exactly when .
The other axioms hold for every . Addition is componentwise, so its axioms hold as in . The multiplication is commutative, because the formula is symmetric under swapping and . The element is an identity,
and both first coordinates equal
If . For ,
If . Let . Then
while and are nonzero. By Proposition 1.1.17 the structure is not a field.
Uses. Lemma 1.1.21 (Arithmetic in ), Proposition 1.1.15 (Multiplying by zero), the division algorithm: if and only if
Let with the addition of , and define
The additive axioms hold by Lemma 1.1.21. For the multiplication we use that whenever . The operation is commutative since . It is associative: differs from by a multiple of , so
and in the same way
By Proposition 1.1.15, distributivity must therefore fail. Indeed , while .
Exercise 1.1.56. is not a field, but there is a field with four elements. Let , four distinct symbols, with the following operations. Addition: is an identity, for every , and the sum of two different elements of is the third. Multiplication: , , , , and .
- (a)Show that is a field.
- (b)Show that , and explain why is not with its elements renamed.
Uses. Definition 1.1.1 (Field), Lemma 1.1.21 (Arithmetic in ), Proposition 1.1.24 ( is a field if and only if is prime), Definition 1.1.28 (Characteristic)
(a) We check the axioms in groups.
Addition. Identify with the pairs
Multiplication. If some factor is , both sides of the commutative and associative laws are . The nonzero elements are , , and , and . Checking the table, for all ; for example
Distributivity. We show
This map respects addition: goes to
So is a field.
(b) and , so . Renaming the elements of cannot change whether it satisfies the field axioms, and is not a field by Proposition 1.1.24 (in it ). So is not a renamed . Another way to see it: for every , while in .
Uses. Proposition 1.1.13 (Solving and ), Proposition 1.1.17 (No zero divisors)
Let be the sum of all elements of . If has exactly two elements, then and , which is the exception.
Suppose has more than two elements, and pick with and . By part (b) of Proposition 1.1.13, for each the equation has exactly one solution, so is a bijection . Hence the elements , for , are the elements of in another order, and their sum is . By distributivity their sum is also . So , that is, . Since , Proposition 1.1.17 gives .
Uses. Definition 1.1.1 (Field)
Techniques. Proving from axioms (Technique 1.1.7)
We may still use commutativity of multiplication, so both distributive laws hold and . Associativity of lets us drop parentheses in sums (the remark in Section 1.1.2 does not need commutativity for this).
Inverses work on both sides. Let , and choose with . Then
is a left identity. With as before,
Cancellation on both sides. Suppose , and let , so as well. Adding on the left,
The main computation. By distributivity, applied in two different ways,
So
More practice
The practice bank has 261 exercises on this section’s topics.