2
$\begingroup$

Let $K$ be a quadratic number field, and $\mu(K)$ the group of roots of unity of $K$. I'm trying to prove that (with the two exceptions of $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{-1})$ and $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{-3})$)

$$\mu(K) = \{1, -1\}$$

The case where $K$ is imaginary is easier, since by Dirichlet's unit theorem, we have

$$\mathcal{O}_K^* = \mu(K) \times \mathbb{Z}^{1 + 0 - 1} = \mu(K)$$

And it is easy to prove that $\alpha \in \mathcal{O}_K^* \iff N(\alpha) = 1$. Dealing with the $d \equiv 2, 3 \mod 4$ and $d \equiv 1 \mod 4$ separately we get a complete characterization of $\mathcal{O}_K^*$, and therefore of $\mu(K)$, for $K$ imaginary.

But for $K$ real this doesn't work anymore, because we have

$$\mathcal{O}_K^* = \mu(K) \times \mathbb{Z}^{0 + 2 - 1} = \mu(K) \times\mathbb{Z}$$

Instead, and the approach above gives infinite units (solution to Pell's equation), and says nothing about the roots of unity.


I'm guessing that one could use the fact that a real quadratic field has only one embedding, and that embedding is real, together with the fact that the only roots of unity in $\mathbb{R}$ are $\pm 1$.

Is there an elementary way to prove the result without separating the real and imaginary case, and/or without using Dirichlet's unit theorem?

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

The real case is actually quite easy! Consider that the torsion subgroup is $\{\alpha : \alpha^n =1\}$ since the group is multiplicative. But then this is exactly the roots of unity. As such you need only note that since $F\subseteq\Bbb R$ we have that only real roots of unity are in this field, i.e. $\{\pm 1\}$.

If you care about the general case all together, it's also easy, again you note that $\mu(K)$ is exactly the roots of unity since torsion iff finite multiplicative order iff root of unity. But then if you have a root of unity, $\zeta_n$, for some $n\ne 2,3,4,6$ (recall $-\zeta_3$ is a primitive $6^{th}$ root of unity) then you have a proper subfield of degree $\phi(n)$. Since $p-1|\phi(n)$ for all $p|n$ we see $n=2^\alpha3^\beta$ otherwise we have a sub-extension of too large a degree. But we have excluded the (non-trivial) cases

$$\begin{cases} \alpha = \beta = 1\\ \alpha=2, \beta = 0 \\ \alpha = 0, \beta = 1 \end{cases}$$

And if $\alpha >2 $ or $\beta >1$ the degree is again too big since then $\phi(n)>2$, so no other cases can occur.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ @nguyenquangdo I'm not sure I see the intent of your comment. $\endgroup$ – Adam Hughes Nov 14 '16 at 23:53
  • $\begingroup$ @nguyenquangdo ah, then you should probably repost that on the original thing and delete these comments here as best practice. $\endgroup$ – Adam Hughes Nov 15 '16 at 13:09
  • $\begingroup$ @nguyenquangdo mouse over your comment and a little x should appear to the right of the timestamp after your name. Click the x to delete $\endgroup$ – Adam Hughes Nov 16 '16 at 13:57
1
$\begingroup$

If $p$ is a prime then $\zeta_p$ satisfies an irreducible equation of degree $p-1$. Since quadratic fields have degree $2$, it remains only to consider the cube roots and the power of $2$ roots.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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