Gauss's Reciprocity Law in Algebraic Number Theory, Study notes of Mathematical Methods for Numerical Analysis and Optimization

A lecture on algebraic number theory focusing on proving gauss's reciprocity law. The lecture covers the legendre symbol, its properties, and gauss's theorem. The document also introduces concepts from galois extensions, ramification theory, and the cyclotomic fields.

Typology: Study notes

2010/2011

Uploaded on 09/06/2011

scream
scream 🇬🇧

4.5

(11)

273 documents

1 / 3

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
Algebraic Number Theory Lecture 10
Sandro Bettin
“You know that I write slowly. This is chiefly because I am never satisfied until I
have said as much as possible in a few words, and writing briefly takes far more
time than writing at length.”
Carl Friedrich Gauss
The goal of the lecture is to prove Gauss’s reciprocity law, using methods related to what we
have done in the past. Firstly, let’s introduce the Legendre symbol.
Definition. For every integer acoprime to p, the Legendre symbol a
pis defined by
a
p=(1 if x2a(mod p) has a solution
1 otherwise.
Elementary properties of group theory show us that the Legendre symbol is multiplicative and
that one has a
pap1
2(mod p)
and this gives
1
p= (1)p1
2,2
p= (1)p21
8
for any odd prime p. Gauss’s reciprocity law gives us what’s left for a full understanding of the
Legendre symbol.
Theorem (Gauss’s reciprocity law).For two distinct odd prime numbers pand q, the following
identity holds:
p
qq
p= (1)(p1)(q1)/4.
To prove this we need to state some other new results from ramification theory.
Proposition 1. Let L/K be a Galois extension, Ban ideal of OLwith ramification index eand
inertia degree f, and ZBthe decomposition field of Bover K. Let BZ=B ZBbe the prime ideal
of ZBbelow B. Then
i) BZis nonsplit in L, i.e. Bis the only prime ideal of Labove BZ.
ii) Bover ZBhas ramification index eand inertia degree f.
iii) The ramification index and the inertia degree of BZover Kboth equal 1.
Definition. Let KL=K(θ) be number fields with θOLand let p(x)OK[x] be the
minimal polynomial of θ. The conductor of the ring OK[θ] is the biggest ideal Fof OLwhich is
contained in OK[θ], i.e.
F={αOL|αOLOK[θ]}.
1
pf3

Partial preview of the text

Download Gauss's Reciprocity Law in Algebraic Number Theory and more Study notes Mathematical Methods for Numerical Analysis and Optimization in PDF only on Docsity!

Algebraic Number Theory – Lecture 10

Sandro Bettin

“You know that I write slowly. This is chiefly because I am never satisfied until I have said as much as possible in a few words, and writing briefly takes far more time than writing at length.”

  • Carl Friedrich Gauss

The goal of the lecture is to prove Gauss’s reciprocity law, using methods related to what we have done in the past. Firstly, let’s introduce the Legendre symbol.

Definition. For every integer a coprime to p, the Legendre symbol

a p

is defined by ( a p

1 if x^2 ≡ a (mod p) has a solution −1 otherwise.

Elementary properties of group theory show us that the Legendre symbol is multiplicative and that one has (^) ( a p

≡ a

p− 1 (^2) (mod p)

and this gives (^) ( − 1 p

p− 2 1 ,

p

p^28 − 1

for any odd prime p. Gauss’s reciprocity law gives us what’s left for a full understanding of the Legendre symbol.

Theorem (Gauss’s reciprocity law). For two distinct odd prime numbers p and q, the following identity holds: (^) ( p q

q p

= (−1)(p−1)(q−1)/^4.

To prove this we need to state some other new results from ramification theory.

Proposition 1. Let L/K be a Galois extension, B an ideal of OL with ramification index e and inertia degree f , and ZB the decomposition field of B over K. Let BZ = B ∩ ZB be the prime ideal of ZB below B. Then

i) BZ is nonsplit in L, i.e. B is the only prime ideal of L above BZ. ii) B over ZB has ramification index e and inertia degree f. iii) The ramification index and the inertia degree of BZ over K both equal 1.

Definition. Let K ⊆ L = K(θ) be number fields with θ ∈ OL and let p(x) ∈ OK [x] be the minimal polynomial of θ. The conductor of the ring OK [θ] is the biggest ideal F of OL which is contained in OK [θ], i.e. F = {α ∈ OL | αOL ⊆ OK [θ]}. 1

2

Proposition 2. Let p ⊆ OK be a prime ideal, coprime with the conductor F of OK [θ], and let

p(x) = p 1 (x)e^1 · · · pr (x)er

be the factorization of the polynomial p(x) = p(x) (mod p) into irreducibles pi(x) = pi(x) (mod p) over the residue class field Ok/p, with all pi ∈ OK [x]. Then

Bi = pOL + pi(θ)OL, i = 1,... , r,

are the different prime ideals of OL above p. The inertia degree fi of Bi is the degree of pi(x), and one has p = Be 11 · · · Be r r.

Proof. See Neukirch. 

Corollary 2.1. For squarefree a and (p, 2 a) = 1, we have that

a p

= 1 if and only if p is totally

split in Q(

a).

Proof.

a p

= 1 signifies that

x^2 − a ≡ (x − α)(x + α) (mod p)

for some α ∈ Z. Since OQ(√a) ⊆ Z[

√a 2 ], the conductor of^ Z[

a] is a divisor of 2 and so we can apply the previous proposition. 

Now we need to now something about the factorization of primes in the cyclotomic fields.

Proposition 3. Let ζn be a primitive nth root of unity with n =

p p νp (^) the prime factorization

of n. Moreover, let fp be the smallest positive integer such that

pfp^ ≡ 1 (mod n/pνp^ ).

Then one has in Q(ζn) the factorization

p = (p 1 · · · pr )φ(p

νp (^) ) ,

where p 1 ,... , pr are distinct prime ideals, all of degree fp.

Proof. See Neukirch (it’s a consequence of Proposition 2). 

Proposition 4. Let q and p be odd primes, q∗^ = (−1) q− 2 1 q and ζq a primitive qth root of unity. Then p is totally split in Q(

q∗) if and only if p splits in Q(ζq ) into an even number of prime ideals.

Proof. A little computation shows that q∗^ = τ 2 ,

where τ is the Gauss sum

τ =

a∈F (^) q∗

a q

ζq a.

Therefore Q(

q∗) ⊆ Q(ζq ). Let’s assume p is totally split in Q(

q∗), say p = p 1 p 2. Since all the extensions Q ⊆ Q(

q∗) ⊆ Q(ζq ) are Galois extension, the number of ideals above p 1 is equal to the number of ideals above p 2 and so p splits in Q(ζq ) into an even number of prime ideals. By the previous proposition these ideals must be distinct since for n = q we have νp = 0.

Conversely, assume pOQ(ζq ) = p 1 · · · pr ,