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.

While reading one of Keith Conrad's great blurbs, Linear Independence of Characters, there is a footnote at the bottom of page 2 saying

In general, the primitive $n$th roots of unity in the $n$th cyclotomic field form a normal basis over $\mathbf{Q}$ if and only if $n$ is squarefree.

A little bit of research didn't turn up any results, except apparently the result is in the paper K. Johnsen, Lineare Abhängigkeiten von Einheitswurzeln. Elem. Math. 40 (1985), 57–59 which I can't find anywhere. (J.M. found it here.)

Could someone be kind enough to give a proof of why this statement is true?


I made this attempt at the if direction. I try induction on $n$. If $n$ is prime, then the result follows from field theory, since the powers of $\alpha$ form a $F$-basis of $F(\alpha)$ over $F$. So let $n=mp$ where $m$ is coprime to $p$. If $n$ is squarefree, so is $m$, so by induction, the $m$th primitive roots of units form a basis for $\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_m)$ over $\mathbb{Q}$.

Then I think the primitive $p$th roots of unity form a basis of $\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_m,\zeta_p)$ over $\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_m)$, so taking pairwise products of the two bases gives a basis of primitive $n$th roots of $\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_m,\zeta_p)$ over $\mathbb{Q}$? Does $\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_m,\zeta_p)=\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_n)$? I know $\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_m,\zeta_p)\subseteq\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_n)$, but am not sure of the other containment, or if this argument is oversimplifying things.

share|improve this question
    
You mean this paper? –  J. M. Dec 1 '11 at 5:49
4  
It's what I figured! Nonetheless, I like to read a precise question. :) –  Bruno Joyal Dec 1 '11 at 6:18
3  
The only if part seems to be easy. If $p^2\mid n$, and $\zeta$ is a primitive root of unity of order $n$, then $\xi=\zeta^{n/p}$ is a primitive root of unity of order $p$, and the sum of the roots $\zeta\xi^j, 0\le j<p,$ equals $\zeta\phi_p(\xi)=0$. But $\zeta\xi^j=\zeta^{1+(n/p)j}$ is a primitive root of unity of order $n$, because all the prime factors of $n$ are also factors of $n/p$. Thus there are linear dependences over the rationals among the primitive roots. I don't know about the other direction. –  Jyrki Lahtonen Dec 1 '11 at 6:39
1  
I looked up the link given by @J.M. The other direction (if) seems to follow from the tensor product decomposition based on the fact that any cyclotomic field is a tensor product (over the rationals) of cyclotomic fields of a prime power conductor. If you can read German at all, please look at the article, and post a summary as an answer. If you don't know any German, I can try and post an outline later. Alas, RL duties won't allow me to put enough time towards doing that until later. –  Jyrki Lahtonen Dec 2 '11 at 10:41
1  
@KCd: the moderators can remove bounties (I think). But is there a reason why you would want the bounty removed, as opposed to awarded to you? (See discussion: meta.math.stackexchange.com/q/3319/1543 If you don't feel like commenting publicly, you can reach me by e-mail.) –  Willie Wong Dec 9 '11 at 10:06

2 Answers 2

up vote 18 down vote accepted
+50

In the comments to the question, Jyrki showed that if $n$ has a square factor then there are nontrivial ${\mathbf Q}$-linear relations among $\{\zeta_n^a : (a,n) = 1\}$, so this set can only be a ${\mathbf Q}$-basis of ${\mathbf Q}(\zeta_n)$ when $n$ is squarefree. To show that when $n$ is squarefree the set $\{\zeta_n^a : (a,n)=1\}$ is a ${\mathbf Q}$-basis of ${\mathbf Q}(\zeta_n)$ we will use induction on the number of prime factors of $n$.

Suppose first that $n = p$ is a prime. The usual ${\mathbf Q}$-basis of ${\mathbf Q}(\zeta_p)$ is $\{1,\zeta_p,\zeta_p^2,\cdots,\zeta_{p}^{p-2}\}$. Since $\zeta_p^{p-1} = -1-\zeta_p - \cdots - \zeta_p^{p-2}$, if we replace $1$ with $\zeta_p^{p-1}$ we still have a ${\mathbf Q}$-basis, so $\{\zeta_p,\zeta_p^2,\cdots,\zeta_p^{p-1}\}$ is a basis of ${\mathbf Q}(\zeta_p)/{\mathbf Q}$.

Now suppose we've proved the result when $n$ is any product of $r$ primes and consider a squarefree positive integer $n$ that is a product of $r+1$ primes. Write $n = mp$ where $p$ is one of the prime factors of $n$, so we know $\{\zeta_m^i : 1 \leq i \leq m, (i,m) = 1\}$ is a ${\mathbf Q}$-basis of ${\mathbf Q}(\zeta_m)$ and $\{\zeta_p^{j} : 1 \leq j \leq p, (j,p) = 1\}$ is a ${\mathbf Q}$-basis of ${\mathbf Q}(\zeta_p)$. From Galois theory, if $E$ and $F$ are (finite) Galois extensions of a common field $L$ and $E \cap F = L$ then as a basis of $EF$ over $L$ one can use the set of products $\{e_if_j\}$ where $\{e_i\}$ is any $L$-basis of $E$ and $\{f_j\}$ is any $L$-basis of $F$. We can apply this to the fields $E = {\mathbf Q}(\zeta_m)$, $F = {\mathbf Q}(\zeta_p)$, and $L = {\mathbf Q}$. (That the intersection of those two cyclotomic fields is ${\mathbf Q}$ is a special case of a general formula ${\mathbf Q}(\zeta_r) \cap {\mathbf Q}(\zeta_s) = {\mathbf Q}(\zeta_{(r,s)})$, which becomes ${\mathbf Q}$ when $r$ and $s$ are relatively prime.) Therefore a ${\mathbf Q}$-basis of $EF = {\mathbf Q}(\zeta_m,\zeta_p) = {\mathbf Q}(\zeta_n)$ is the set of products $\{\zeta_m^i\zeta_p^j\}$ with $i$ and $j$ running over the integers listed earlier. Inside ${\mathbf Q}(\zeta_n)$ we can use $\zeta_m := \zeta_n^{n/m}$ and $\zeta_p := \zeta_n^{n/p}$, so a basis is $\{\zeta_n^{(n/m)i + (n/p)j}\} = \{\zeta_n^{pi + mj}\}$ where $i$ runs over integers from 1 to $m$ which are relatively prime to $m$ and $j$ runs over integers from 1 to $p$ which are relatively prime to $p$ (that is, $1 \leq j \leq p-1$).

Which $n$th roots of unity are in the set $\{\zeta_n^{pi + mj}\}$ and how many are there? The integers $pi+mj$ are all relatively prime to $n = mp$ (just reduce them mod $m$ and mod $p$ to check they are relatively prime to $m$ and $p$ separately), so the set consists of primitive $n$th roots of unity. If $pi + mj \equiv pi' + mj' \bmod n$ (where $i'$ and $j'$ are just second choices of parameters) then by reducing mod $m$ and mod $p$ we get $i \equiv i' \bmod m$ and $j \equiv j' \bmod p$, so $i = i'$ and $j = j'$ on account of the ranges of these parameters. Therefore the number of roots of unity in this set is $\varphi(m)\varphi(p) = \varphi(n)$, so our set is exactly the set of all primitive $n$th roots of unity. This completes the proof that the primitive $n$th roots of unity are a ${\mathbf Q}$-basis of ${\mathbf Q}(\zeta_n)$ when $n$ is squarefree.

Although the question has now been answered, let me indicate a place where it naturally fits into a broader picture within algebraic number theory. The result is related to a theorem of Emmy Noether on normal integral bases.

For any (finite) Galois extension $K/{\mathbf Q}$, a normal integral basis is a normal basis for the field extension which consists of a ${\mathbf Z}$-basis of ${\mathcal O}_K$. For example, ${\mathbf Q}(\sqrt{5})/{\mathbf Q}$ has normal integral basis $\{(1+\sqrt{5})/2,(1-\sqrt{5})/2\}$. Another example is ${\mathbf Q}(\zeta_p)$ for any odd prime $p$: the ring of integers is ${\mathbf Z}[\zeta_p]$ and the usual ${\mathbf Z}$-basis you may want to use is $\{1,\zeta_p,\cdots,\zeta_p^{p-2}\}$, but that's not a normal basis because it has 1 in it. Instead you can use $\{\zeta_p,\zeta_p^2,\cdots,\zeta_p^{p-1}\}$; that is a normal basis and it's also a ${\mathbf Z}$-basis of ${\mathbf Z}[\zeta_p]$, so ${\mathbf Q}(\zeta_p)/{\mathbf Q}$ has a normal integral basis.

Here's an example without a normal integral basis. If $d$ is squarefree and not $1 \bmod 4$, the ring of integers of ${\mathbf Q}(\sqrt{d})$ is ${\mathbf Z}[\sqrt{d}]$. A normal basis over ${\mathbf Q}$ has the form $\{a+b\sqrt{d},a-b\sqrt{d}\}$ for rational $a$ and $b$ with $b \not= 0$. If this basis is in ${\mathbf Z}[\sqrt{d}]$ then it can't be a ${\mathbf Z}$-basis of ${\mathbf Z}[\sqrt{d}]$ because ${\mathbf Z}(a+b\sqrt{d}) + {\mathbf Z}(a-b\sqrt{d})$ has index $2|ab| \geq 2$ inside ${\mathbf Z}[\sqrt{d}]$.

The ring of integers of ${\mathbf Q}(\zeta_n)$ is ${\mathbf Z}[\zeta_n]$. Check that if $\{\zeta_n^a : (a,n) = 1\}$ were a basis of ${\mathbf Q}(\zeta_n)/{\mathbf Q}$ then it would be a ${\mathbf Z}$-basis of ${\mathbf Z}[\zeta_n]$, hence the $n$-th cyclotomic field would have a normal integral basis.

Emmy Noether proved that if a Galois extension $K/{\mathbf Q}$ has a normal integral basis then $K$ is tamely ramified over ${\mathbf Q}$. So being tamely ramified is a necessary (although generally not sufficient) condition for a Galois extension of ${\mathbf Q}$ to have a normal integral basis. For example, if $d$ is squarefree and $d \not\equiv 1 \bmod 4$ then 2 is not tamely ramified in ${\mathbf Q}(\sqrt{d})$, so Noether's theorem implies that this quadratic field has no normal integral basis over ${\mathbf Q}$, which we already proved by a direct computation above. An example more relevant for us here is ${\mathbf Q}(\zeta_{p^2})$. The prime $p$ is not tamely ramified in this field, so any cyclotomic field ${\mathbf Q}(\zeta_n)$ with $n$ divisible by the square of a prime is not tamely ramified at that prime, hence it doesn't have a normal integral basis. Therefore a necessary condition for $\{\zeta_n^a : (a,n) = 1\}$ to be a normal basis of the $n$-th cyclotomic field is that $n$ is squarefree. Noether's theorem has provided a conceptual explanation for why $n$ must be squarefree.

I suggest looking at Robert Long's book "Algebraic Number Theory" for more information on tamely ramified extensions of ${\mathbf Q}$ and the relation to normal integral bases. I don't have the book in front of me right now and Google Books is not giving good views of it, but I'm pretty sure he has a chapter on this topic in it since Galois module structure was one of his areas of interest.

share|improve this answer

But the solution would be trying on induction, I am not sure but I looked for some help and found this :

Solution : Consider $n$ to be a prime number, and we know that powers of the adjoined element in a simple extension form a basis. But when $n=kp$, $k$ is squarefree, so by the induction, the primitive $k$-th roots of unity form a basis for $\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{k})/\mathbb{Q}$ . By the result of simple extensions, the primitive $p$-th roots of unity form a $\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{k})$ basis of $\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{k},\zeta_{p})$ over $\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{k})$ , so letting the basis run over products of primitive roots of $\zeta_{p}$ and $\zeta_{k}$ gives a basis of primitive $n$-th roots of $\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{k},\zeta_{p})$ over $\mathbb{Q}$.

I never want a bounty even though if this answer may be right,

Thank you .

share|improve this answer
1  
I think you have the right idea, but I'd like to see more details. Is it useful that $\phi(kp)=\phi(k)\phi(p)$ and that $\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_p,\zeta_k)=\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{pk})$? –  Alison Dec 5 '11 at 7:26

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.