This preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.
View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: SOLUTIONS TO PROBLEMS 3.5, 3.9.5, 3.11, 3.13.5 KATE THOMPSON 3.5 Let p be an odd prime number, and let u Z be a quadratic nonresidue modulo p . Then [ Q p : Q 2 p ] = 4, and a set of coset representatives is 1 ,p,u,pu . Solutions: First, we intend to use Hensels Lemma for this proof; given that, we feel obligated to state which version we will use. Lemma. (Hensels Lemma) Let ( K,v ) be a Henselian (e.g. complete) valued field with valuation ring R and residue field k . Let f R [ t ] . If there exists an R such that v ( f ( )) > 2 v ( f ( )) , then there exists a R with f ( ) = 0 and v (  ) > v ( f ( )) . Let P ( X ) = X 2 a for a a padic integer. It is clear that there is a root in Z p only if v ( a ) = v ( x 2 ) = 2 v ( x ) is even. Then, by dividing a by an appropriate power of p 2 m , we can reduce to the case v ( a ) = 0, or a Z p . Now we claim that if a Z p is a padic unit and if there exists such that 2 a (mod p Z p ), then a is a square of an element in Z p . To see this, apply Hensels lemma to X 2 a . Since p 6 = 2 and a Z p , we are guaranteed to have 2 6 0 (mod p ) so were fine. Next, we claim that x Q p is a square if and only if x = p 2 n y 2 for n Z , and y Z p a p adic unit. One direction is obvious. The second direction is also fairly obviousjust refer to the previous case, and also note that p is itself NOT a square in Q p (since if it had a square root, then that square root would have valuation 1 2 ). We can conclude then that Q p : Q 2 p = 4, and is given by { 1 ,p,u,pu } for u a quadratic nonresidue in Z p . Referring to the text below this Exercise in the course notes, we can moreover conclude that Q p / ( Q 2 p ) = Z / 2 Z Z / 2 Z 3.9.5 A very special and important quadratic form is q H ( x 1 ,x 2 ) = x 1 x 2 , the socalled hyperbolic plane . a) Let K be any field of characteristic different from 2. Give an explicit change of variables that diagonalizes q H . Solutions: Short answer: let P = 1 1 2 1 2 1 Why does this definitely work? Since the characteristic of our field is not 2, we can represent the quadratic form x 1 x 2 as the following symmetric matrix: M = 2 1 2 1 Thus, using matrix theory, we claim that P works. To confirm, we compute: 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 = 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 = 2 1 2 1 Last, note that since the characteristic of a field is NOT 2, 2 1 exists. 1 b) Show by brute force that q H cannot be diagonalized over F 2 . See part (c) for a less forceful method. , c) Show that q H cannot be diagonalized over any field of characteristic 2....
View
Full
Document
This note was uploaded on 10/26/2011 for the course MATH 8410 taught by Professor Staff during the Fall '11 term at University of Georgia Athens.
 Fall '11
 Staff
 Number Theory

Click to edit the document details