Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I was recently reading about integral ring extensions. One of the first examples given is that $\mathbb{Z}$ is integrally closed in its quotient field $\mathbb{Q}$. Another is that $\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{5}]$ is not integrally closed in $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{5})$ since for example $(1+\sqrt{5})/2\in\mathbb{Q}[\sqrt{5}]$ is integral over $\mathbb{Z}$ as a root of $X^2-X-1$, but $(1+\sqrt{5})/2\notin\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{5}]$.

Now I'm curious, can we find what are all integers $n$ such that $\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{n}]$ is integrally closed (equal to its integral closure in its quotient field)?

One thing I do know is that unique factorization domains are integrally closed, so I think rings like $\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{-1}]$, $\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{-2}]$, $\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{2}]$ and $\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{3}]$ are integrally closed, as they are Euclidean domains, and thus are UFDs. But can we say what all integers $n$ are such that $\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{n}]$ is integrally closed? Thanks!

share|improve this question
4  
Dear yunone, Did you try answering this yourself, working from the definitions? It's not that hard, and would be a very good exercise. Regards, –  Matt E Jan 20 '12 at 2:06
add comment

3 Answers

up vote 5 down vote accepted

Let's assume that $n$ is squarefree. I think it would be best to explore this without using knowledge of the answer. You want to find the integers in $\mathbf Q(\sqrt n)$. These are elements which satisfy a quadratic with integer coefficients. Every element looks like $a + b\sqrt{n}$ for some $a, b \in \mathbf Q$.

Recall that the conjugate of this element will be $a - b\sqrt n$. So it certainly satisfies \[ (X - a - b\sqrt n)(X - a + b\sqrt n) = X^2 - 2aX + a^2 - nb^2. \] You need the coefficients $-2a$ and $a^2 - nb^2$ to lie in $\mathbf Z$. (You might recognize these as the trace and norm.) If this is the case, then as $(2a)^2 - n(2b)^2$ is an integer (divisible by $4$) and $n$ is squarefree, it follows that $2b \in \mathbf Z$ as well.

At this point, it makes sense to work mod $4$: we know that this last expression vanishes there, and the only squares are $0$ and $1$. For example, if $n \equiv 2$ then $(2a)^2$ and $(2b)^2$ must both be congruent to $0$, and it follows that $a$ and $b$ are in $\mathbf Z$.

share|improve this answer
    
Thank you Dylan, I get that $(2a)^2-n(2b)^2$ is an integer, but why does that imply $2b$ is an integer? I only conclude $n(2b)^2$ is an integer. After that, I understand the rest of the argument. –  yunone Jan 20 '12 at 6:41
    
@yunone Well, anything in the denominator of $(2b)^2$ would be a square, and hence can't be canceled by $n$. Does that make sense? –  Dylan Moreland Jan 20 '12 at 14:13
    
Oh yes, that's clear now. Thanks. –  yunone Jan 21 '12 at 22:06
add comment

$\mathbb Z[\sqrt{n}]$ is integrally closed in $\mathbb Q(\sqrt{n})$ ($n\in\mathbb Z$, $n\neq1$) if and only if $n$ is square free and $n$ is not congruent to $1$ mod $4$ (or $n$ is a perfect square, in that case we have $\mathbb Z$ and $\mathbb Q$; thanks Arturo).

Moreover, if $n\equiv1 \mod 4$, then $\mathbb Z[\frac{1+\sqrt{n}}{2}]$ is integrally closed in $\mathbb Q(\sqrt{n})$.

Sketch of proof of why $\mathbb Z[\sqrt{n}]$ is integrally closed in $\mathbb Q(\sqrt{n})$ for $n$ a square free number not congruent to $1$ module $4$.Let $\mathcal O$ be the set of integers numbers in $\mathbb Q(\sqrt{n})$. We can see that $\mathbb Z[\sqrt{n}]\subseteq\mathcal O$ (looking for suitable polynomials).

Let $\alpha=p+q\sqrt{n}\in\mathcal O-\mathbb Z$ with $p,q\in\mathbb Q$. $\alpha$ is a root of the polynomial $$ f(x)=(x-\alpha)(x-\bar\alpha)=x^2-2px+(p^2-nq^2). $$ But $f(x)$ is monic and of minimal degree (with coefficients in $\mathbb Q$), so it has to divide to the monic polynomial $g(x)\in\mathbb Z[x]$ which $g(\alpha)=0$. This implies that $f(x)\in\mathbb Z[x]$, thus $2p,p^2-mq^2\in\mathbb Z$. Now, you should prove that $p$ and $q$ are in $\mathbb Z$ since $n\equiv 2,3\mod4$.

share|improve this answer
1  
Well, aren't you missing the cases where $n$ is a perfect square? In that case, $\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{n}]=\mathbb{Z}$ and $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{n}) = \mathbb{Q}$... –  Arturo Magidin Jan 20 '12 at 4:20
    
Thank you emiliocba. Do you mind explaining why the first statement is actually true? I've been trying to prove it myself, but have gotten stuck. I did realize that in the case where $n\equiv 1\bmod 4$, then writing $n=4k+1$, $\frac{1+\sqrt{n}}{2}$ is a root of $X^2-X-k$, but even then I'm note sure how to ensure $\frac{1+\sqrt{n}}{2}\notin\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{n}]$. Also, how does one see the cases where $n$ is square free and $n\equiv 2,3\pmod{4}$? –  yunone Jan 20 '12 at 4:26
    
I added how to prove it for $n\equiv 2,3\pmod4$. –  emiliocba Jan 20 '12 at 5:08
    
Thanks for adding that emiliocba, I appreciate the help. –  yunone Jan 20 '12 at 5:42
add comment

Here's an extremely low-level way of doing it, just using the definition and some easy integer computations.

We may write $n=d^2m$, where $d$ and $m$ are integers, and $m$ is square free. Then $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{n}) = \mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{m})$, and $$\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{n}] = \{a + db\sqrt{m}\mid a,b\in\mathbb{Z}\}.$$

If $m=1$, then $\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{n}]=\mathbb{Z}$, $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{n}) = \mathbb{Q}$, so $\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{n}]$ is integrally closed in $\mathbb{Q}[\sqrt{n}]$.

Assume then that $m\neq 1$.

If $d^2\gt 1$, then $\sqrt{m}\in\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{n})$, and satisfies $x^2-m\in\mathbb{Z}[x]$, but is not in $\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{n}]$. So we may assume $d^2=1$; that is, $n$ is squarefree.

Now assume that $a=\frac{p}{q} + \frac{r}{s}\sqrt{n}\in\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{n})$ ($n$ squarefree, $n\neq 1$), $\gcd(p,q)=\gcd(r,s)=1$, $q\gt 0$, $s\gt 0$, is integral over $\mathbb{Z}$. If $r=0$, then $a\in\mathbb{Q}$, so by virtue of being integral it lies in $\mathbb{Z}\subseteq\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{n}]$.

If $r\neq 0$, then $a$ satisfies the polynomial $$\left( x - \frac{p}{q}-\frac{r}{s}\sqrt{n}\right)\left(x - \frac{p}{q}+\frac{r}{s}\sqrt{n}\right)$$ that is, $$x^2 - \frac{2p}{q}x + \frac{p^2}{q^2}-\frac{r^2n}{s^2}.$$ For $a$ to be integral, this must have integer coefficients. In particular, $q|2p$, and so either $q=1$ or $q=2$.

If $q=1$, then we must have $s^2|n$. Since $n$ is squarefree, this requires $s=1$. So if $q=1$, then the element must be in $\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{n}]$ and we are fine.

Can $q=2$? If $q=2$, then we need $$\frac{p^2}{4} - \frac{r^2n}{s^2} = \frac{p^2s^2 - 4r^2n}{4s^2}\in\mathbb{Z}.$$ Therefore, $4|p^2s^2$; since $q=2$, then $p$ is odd, so $4|s^2$, and so $s=2k$ is even. We have $$\frac{4p^2k^2 - 4r^2n}{16k^2} = \frac{p^2k^2-r^2n}{4k^2}\in\mathbb{Z}.$$ Now, both $p$ and $r$ are odd, so $p^2\equiv r^2\equiv 1\pmod{4}$; since $4$ divides $p^2k^2-r^2n$, and $p^2k^2-r^2n\equiv k^2-n\equiv 0\pmod{4}$, then remembering that $n$ is square free (hence not congruent to $0$ modulo $4$) we conclude that $n\equiv 1\pmod{4}$.

So the only way in which $\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{n}]$ with $n$ squarefree can fail to be integrally closed is if $n\equiv 1\pmod{4}$. And indeed, if $n\equiv 1 \pmod{4}$, then we can take $p=r=1$, $q=s=2$, and we get that $\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{n}$ is integral but not in $\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{n}]$.

In summary: if $n=d^2m$ with $m$ square free, then:

  1. If $m=1$, then $\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{n}]=\mathbb{Z}$ is integrally closed in $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{n}) = \mathbb{Q}$.
  2. If $m\gt 1$ and $d^2\gt 1$, then $\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{n}]$ is not integrally closed in $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{n})$, witnessed by $\sqrt{m}$.
  3. If $d^2=1$, and $n$ is not congruent to $1$ modulo $4$, then $\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{n}]$ is integrally closed in $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{n})$.
  4. If $d^2$ and $n\equiv 1\pmod{4}$, then $\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{n}]$ is not integrally closed in $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{n})$, witnessed by $\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{n}$.

So $\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{n}]$ is integrally closed if and only if $n$ is a perfect square, or $n$ is square free, different from $1$, and not congruent to $1$ modulo $4$.

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks Arturo, low level seems to be my level. Out of curiosity, when you say assume $m>1$, would it also be ok to just assume $m\neq 1$, in order to take care of the cases where $n<0$? I don't think anything breaks, but I just wanted to be sure. –  yunone Jan 20 '12 at 5:41
    
@yunone: Oops, that should indeed be $m\neq 1$, not $m\gt 1$. –  Arturo Magidin Jan 20 '12 at 5:42
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.