Are All Units in Z[sqrt(2)] of the Form +/- (1 +/- sqrt(2))^n?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Phillips101
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Units
Click For Summary
Every unit in Z[sqrt(2)] can be expressed as +/- (1 +/- sqrt(2))^n, but proving that all units take this form is challenging. The discussion highlights the use of the norm function, ν(a+b√2) = a² - 2b², which is crucial for determining invertibility in this number system. A lemma establishes that the smallest element greater than 1 with a norm of ±1 is 1 + sqrt(2). The argument proceeds by showing that any unit can be represented as a power of this smallest element, thus confirming the original claim. The exploration illustrates the connection between units in Z[sqrt(2)] and properties of the norm function.
Phillips101
Messages
33
Reaction score
0
How would I show that every unit in Z[sqrt(2)] is of the form +/- (1 +/- sqrt(2) )^n ?

I can show these are all units, but I can't show every unit is one of these. From some research, I'm aware this is a special case of Dirichlet's Unit Theorem, but that is far above the level I'm working at.

Any help would be appreciated :)

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Every element of Z[\sqrt{2}] is of the form a+b\sqrt{2}, a,b integers.

Suppose a+b\sqrt{2} is a unit. Then: (a+b\sqrt{2})(c+d\sqrt{2})=1.

So:ac+(bc+ad)\sqrt{2}+2bd=1. So already you know that bc=-ad.

Now just try manipulating the expression you are left with: (ac+2bd=1) using this fact. You should be able to show that a,b,c,d must all be either 1 or -1.
 
The problem is they don't have to. For example, 3+2\sqrt{2 is unit in \mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{2} ]. I'm also trying to solve this problem right now.

Edit: I think I got it. Let \nu(a+b\sqrt{2})=a^2-2b^2. It's multiplicative, so z is unit iff \nu(z)=\pm 1. It's easy to see that signs of a and b doesn't matter when it comes to invertibility, so we can assume z>0.

Lemma Smallest element of \mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{2}] with z>1 and \nu(z)=\pm 1 is 1+\sqrt{2}
Proof
Let a,b\in \mathbb{N}. If such element is of type a-b\sqrt{2}>1, then a+b\sqrt{2}>1 and so \nu({a-b\sqrt{2}})>1. Similarly if it's -a+b\sqrt{2}. It has to be a+b\sqrt{2}. Case with one of a, b equal zero is easily checked by hand. This proves the lemma.

Now suppose \nu(z)=1, z > 0. Let z_0 = 1+\sqrt{2}. There exists integer k (positive or negative) with z_0^k \leq z < z_0^{k+1}. Easily to check, 1\leq z z_0^{-k} < z_0. If z z_0^{-k}\neq 1, it contradicts minimality of z_0, and so z=z_0^k.

Hope I haven't messed up too badly.
 
Last edited:
I am studying the mathematical formalism behind non-commutative geometry approach to quantum gravity. I was reading about Hopf algebras and their Drinfeld twist with a specific example of the Moyal-Weyl twist defined as F=exp(-iλ/2θ^(μν)∂_μ⊗∂_ν) where λ is a constant parametar and θ antisymmetric constant tensor. {∂_μ} is the basis of the tangent vector space over the underlying spacetime Now, from my understanding the enveloping algebra which appears in the definition of the Hopf algebra...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
Replies
48
Views
4K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
605
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
6K