Mixing
Prove $ mathbb{Z}[sqrt {-5}] $ is not a UFD without factoring?
3
$begingroup$
We know the ring $ mathbb{Z}[sqrt{-5}] $ is not a UFD.
The typical proof is showing that $6$ factors in $2$ ways.
But there must be a better way to show this than to do trial and error factoring of some random element of the ring.
So how does one prove $ mathbb{Z}[sqrt{-5}] $ is not a UFD without factoring a certain element ?
I can show it must be atomic and has a finite amount of units. But that is insufficient and perhaps even irrelevant ; UFD have that too.
ring-theory factoring alternative-proof unique-factorization-domains
edited Jan 24 at 12:10
DonAntonio
179k1494233
asked Jan 24 at 12:07
mickmick
5,19332164
$endgroup$
|
show 10 more comments
3
$begingroup$
We know the ring $ mathbb{Z}[sqrt{-5}] $ is not a UFD.
The typical proof is showing that $6$ factors in $2$ ways.
But there must be a better way to show this than to do trial and error factoring of some random element of the ring.
So how does one prove $ mathbb{Z}[sqrt{-5}] $ is not a UFD without factoring a certain element ?
I can show it must be atomic and has a finite amount of units. But that is insufficient and perhaps even irrelevant ; UFD have that too.
ring-theory factoring alternative-proof unique-factorization-domains
edited Jan 24 at 12:10
DonAntonio
179k1494233
asked Jan 24 at 12:07
mickmick
5,19332164
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Show that it's not a GCD domain, for example. i.e. find two elements such that the ideal generated by them is not principal.
$endgroup$
– stressed out
Jan 24 at 12:09
$begingroup$
But how do we do that without factoring ? Seems alot like factoring 6 to me.
$endgroup$
– mick
Jan 24 at 12:12
2
$begingroup$
In the title you say something, but in the question itself you say something way harsh: "There must be a better way" . Better....wrt what, or for whom? Showing the decomposition in two wasy of $;6;$ , say, looks to me as simple and "good" as one can expect...what do you mean by "better" here? And the element is not that random: doing a little arithmetic one gets with very simple elements the dcompositions!
$endgroup$
– DonAntonio
Jan 24 at 12:16
1
$begingroup$
It depends what background you allow. The method using a factorization of 6 has the advantage of being simple: it does not need a lot of machinery. You could instead show the ideal $(2,1+sqrt{-5})$ is not principal: it is known that a Dedekind domain is a UFD iff it is a PID. But that requires a lot more work to justify (both proving the result and showing $mathbf Z[sqrt{-5}]$ is a Dedekind domain). The Dedekind property is crucial: $mathbf Z[x]$ is a UFD and not a PID!
$endgroup$
– KCd
Jan 24 at 12:18
3
$begingroup$
Again, $,6,$ is not that random. In $;Bbb Z[sqrt{-n}];,;;ninBbb N;$, I would go first precisely on $;n+1;$ . Why? because $$(1-sqrt{-n})(1+sqrt{-n})=1+n$$ Randomness doesn't work a lot in mahtematics.
$endgroup$
– DonAntonio
Jan 24 at 12:37
|
show 10 more comments
3
3
3
1
$begingroup$
We know the ring $ mathbb{Z}[sqrt{-5}] $ is not a UFD.
The typical proof is showing that $6$ factors in $2$ ways.
But there must be a better way to show this than to do trial and error factoring of some random element of the ring.
So how does one prove $ mathbb{Z}[sqrt{-5}] $ is not a UFD without factoring a certain element ?
I can show it must be atomic and has a finite amount of units. But that is insufficient and perhaps even irrelevant ; UFD have that too.
ring-theory factoring alternative-proof unique-factorization-domains
edited Jan 24 at 12:10
DonAntonio
179k1494233
asked Jan 24 at 12:07
mickmick
5,19332164
$endgroup$
We know the ring $ mathbb{Z}[sqrt{-5}] $ is not a UFD.
The typical proof is showing that $6$ factors in $2$ ways.
But there must be a better way to show this than to do trial and error factoring of some random element of the ring.
So how does one prove $ mathbb{Z}[sqrt{-5}] $ is not a UFD without factoring a certain element ?
I can show it must be atomic and has a finite amount of units. But that is insufficient and perhaps even irrelevant ; UFD have that too.
ring-theory factoring alternative-proof unique-factorization-domains
ring-theory factoring alternative-proof unique-factorization-domains
edited Jan 24 at 12:10
DonAntonio
179k1494233
asked Jan 24 at 12:07
mickmick
5,19332164
edited Jan 24 at 12:10
DonAntonio
179k1494233
asked Jan 24 at 12:07
mickmick
5,19332164
edited Jan 24 at 12:10
DonAntonio
179k1494233
edited Jan 24 at 12:10
DonAntonio
179k1494233
edited Jan 24 at 12:10
DonAntonio
179k1494233
179k1494233
asked Jan 24 at 12:07
mickmick
5,19332164
asked Jan 24 at 12:07
mickmick
5,19332164
asked Jan 24 at 12:07
mickmick
5,19332164
5,19332164
$begingroup$
Show that it's not a GCD domain, for example. i.e. find two elements such that the ideal generated by them is not principal.
$endgroup$
– stressed out
Jan 24 at 12:09
$begingroup$
But how do we do that without factoring ? Seems alot like factoring 6 to me.
$endgroup$
– mick
Jan 24 at 12:12
2
$begingroup$
In the title you say something, but in the question itself you say something way harsh: "There must be a better way" . Better....wrt what, or for whom? Showing the decomposition in two wasy of $;6;$ , say, looks to me as simple and "good" as one can expect...what do you mean by "better" here? And the element is not that random: doing a little arithmetic one gets with very simple elements the dcompositions!
$endgroup$
– DonAntonio
Jan 24 at 12:16
1
$begingroup$
It depends what background you allow. The method using a factorization of 6 has the advantage of being simple: it does not need a lot of machinery. You could instead show the ideal $(2,1+sqrt{-5})$ is not principal: it is known that a Dedekind domain is a UFD iff it is a PID. But that requires a lot more work to justify (both proving the result and showing $mathbf Z[sqrt{-5}]$ is a Dedekind domain). The Dedekind property is crucial: $mathbf Z[x]$ is a UFD and not a PID!
$endgroup$
– KCd
Jan 24 at 12:18
3
$begingroup$
Again, $,6,$ is not that random. In $;Bbb Z[sqrt{-n}];,;;ninBbb N;$, I would go first precisely on $;n+1;$ . Why? because $$(1-sqrt{-n})(1+sqrt{-n})=1+n$$ Randomness doesn't work a lot in mahtematics.
$endgroup$
– DonAntonio
Jan 24 at 12:37
|
show 10 more comments
$begingroup$
Show that it's not a GCD domain, for example. i.e. find two elements such that the ideal generated by them is not principal.
$endgroup$
– stressed out
Jan 24 at 12:09
$begingroup$
But how do we do that without factoring ? Seems alot like factoring 6 to me.
$endgroup$
– mick
Jan 24 at 12:12
2
$begingroup$
In the title you say something, but in the question itself you say something way harsh: "There must be a better way" . Better....wrt what, or for whom? Showing the decomposition in two wasy of $;6;$ , say, looks to me as simple and "good" as one can expect...what do you mean by "better" here? And the element is not that random: doing a little arithmetic one gets with very simple elements the dcompositions!
$endgroup$
– DonAntonio
Jan 24 at 12:16
1
$begingroup$
It depends what background you allow. The method using a factorization of 6 has the advantage of being simple: it does not need a lot of machinery. You could instead show the ideal $(2,1+sqrt{-5})$ is not principal: it is known that a Dedekind domain is a UFD iff it is a PID. But that requires a lot more work to justify (both proving the result and showing $mathbf Z[sqrt{-5}]$ is a Dedekind domain). The Dedekind property is crucial: $mathbf Z[x]$ is a UFD and not a PID!
$endgroup$
– KCd
Jan 24 at 12:18
3
$begingroup$
Again, $,6,$ is not that random. In $;Bbb Z[sqrt{-n}];,;;ninBbb N;$, I would go first precisely on $;n+1;$ . Why? because $$(1-sqrt{-n})(1+sqrt{-n})=1+n$$ Randomness doesn't work a lot in mahtematics.
$endgroup$
– DonAntonio
Jan 24 at 12:37
$begingroup$
Show that it's not a GCD domain, for example. i.e. find two elements such that the ideal generated by them is not principal.
$endgroup$
– stressed out
Jan 24 at 12:09
$begingroup$
Show that it's not a GCD domain, for example. i.e. find two elements such that the ideal generated by them is not principal.
$endgroup$
– stressed out
Jan 24 at 12:09
$begingroup$
But how do we do that without factoring ? Seems alot like factoring 6 to me.
$endgroup$
– mick
Jan 24 at 12:12
$begingroup$
But how do we do that without factoring ? Seems alot like factoring 6 to me.
$endgroup$
– mick
Jan 24 at 12:12
2
2
$begingroup$
In the title you say something, but in the question itself you say something way harsh: "There must be a better way" . Better....wrt what, or for whom? Showing the decomposition in two wasy of $;6;$ , say, looks to me as simple and "good" as one can expect...what do you mean by "better" here? And the element is not that random: doing a little arithmetic one gets with very simple elements the dcompositions!
$endgroup$
– DonAntonio
Jan 24 at 12:16
$begingroup$
In the title you say something, but in the question itself you say something way harsh: "There must be a better way" . Better....wrt what, or for whom? Showing the decomposition in two wasy of $;6;$ , say, looks to me as simple and "good" as one can expect...what do you mean by "better" here? And the element is not that random: doing a little arithmetic one gets with very simple elements the dcompositions!
$endgroup$
– DonAntonio
Jan 24 at 12:16
1
1
$begingroup$
It depends what background you allow. The method using a factorization of 6 has the advantage of being simple: it does not need a lot of machinery. You could instead show the ideal $(2,1+sqrt{-5})$ is not principal: it is known that a Dedekind domain is a UFD iff it is a PID. But that requires a lot more work to justify (both proving the result and showing $mathbf Z[sqrt{-5}]$ is a Dedekind domain). The Dedekind property is crucial: $mathbf Z[x]$ is a UFD and not a PID!
$endgroup$
– KCd
Jan 24 at 12:18
$begingroup$
It depends what background you allow. The method using a factorization of 6 has the advantage of being simple: it does not need a lot of machinery. You could instead show the ideal $(2,1+sqrt{-5})$ is not principal: it is known that a Dedekind domain is a UFD iff it is a PID. But that requires a lot more work to justify (both proving the result and showing $mathbf Z[sqrt{-5}]$ is a Dedekind domain). The Dedekind property is crucial: $mathbf Z[x]$ is a UFD and not a PID!
$endgroup$
– KCd
Jan 24 at 12:18
3
3
$begingroup$
Again, $,6,$ is not that random. In $;Bbb Z[sqrt{-n}];,;;ninBbb N;$, I would go first precisely on $;n+1;$ . Why? because $$(1-sqrt{-n})(1+sqrt{-n})=1+n$$ Randomness doesn't work a lot in mahtematics.
$endgroup$
– DonAntonio
Jan 24 at 12:37
$begingroup$
Again, $,6,$ is not that random. In $;Bbb Z[sqrt{-n}];,;;ninBbb N;$, I would go first precisely on $;n+1;$ . Why? because $$(1-sqrt{-n})(1+sqrt{-n})=1+n$$ Randomness doesn't work a lot in mahtematics.
$endgroup$
– DonAntonio
Jan 24 at 12:37
|
show 10 more comments
0
active
oldest
votes
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3085803%2fprove-mathbbz-sqrt-5-is-not-a-ufd-without-factoring%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
draft saved
draft discarded
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3085803%2fprove-mathbbz-sqrt-5-is-not-a-ufd-without-factoring%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Show that it's not a GCD domain, for example. i.e. find two elements such that the ideal generated by them is not principal.
$endgroup$
– stressed out
Jan 24 at 12:09
$begingroup$
But how do we do that without factoring ? Seems alot like factoring 6 to me.
$endgroup$
– mick
Jan 24 at 12:12
2
$begingroup$
In the title you say something, but in the question itself you say something way harsh: "There must be a better way" . Better....wrt what, or for whom? Showing the decomposition in two wasy of $;6;$ , say, looks to me as simple and "good" as one can expect...what do you mean by "better" here? And the element is not that random: doing a little arithmetic one gets with very simple elements the dcompositions!
$endgroup$
– DonAntonio
Jan 24 at 12:16
1
$begingroup$
It depends what background you allow. The method using a factorization of 6 has the advantage of being simple: it does not need a lot of machinery. You could instead show the ideal $(2,1+sqrt{-5})$ is not principal: it is known that a Dedekind domain is a UFD iff it is a PID. But that requires a lot more work to justify (both proving the result and showing $mathbf Z[sqrt{-5}]$ is a Dedekind domain). The Dedekind property is crucial: $mathbf Z[x]$ is a UFD and not a PID!
$endgroup$
– KCd
Jan 24 at 12:18
3
$begingroup$
Again, $,6,$ is not that random. In $;Bbb Z[sqrt{-n}];,;;ninBbb N;$, I would go first precisely on $;n+1;$ . Why? because $$(1-sqrt{-n})(1+sqrt{-n})=1+n$$ Randomness doesn't work a lot in mahtematics.
$endgroup$
– DonAntonio
Jan 24 at 12:37