8
$\begingroup$

I am trying to show that the ideal class group, $Cl(A)$ of $K:=\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{-65})$, where $A$ is the ring of integers of $K$, is isomorphic to the product two cyclic groups of order 2 and 4, respectively. I am going to share the process I have followed and enumerate the questions I have come up with.

By now, since $-65\equiv 3\mod(4)$ the discriminant is $\Delta=-4\cdot 65$, $A=\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{-65}]$, the group of units is $U(K)=\{\pm 1\}$, and since we are working with a complex quadratic extension $r_1=0$, $r_2=1$ , and the Minkowski bound is $\mathcal{M}<11$. Therefore, every ideal class must have a prime ideal of norm less or equal than $ 10$.

Since every ideal class must have a prime ideal of norm less or equal than 10, the only primes we have to study are those generated by $2,3,4,5,7,$ and $9$ ($\textbf{1.}$ Why is it that all prime ideals must have norm $p$ or $p^2$?).

Now, since $2$ and $5$ are the only primes that ramify (because $2,5|\Delta$), then there doesn't exist any prime ideal of norm $4$ ($\textbf{2.}$ Why?). Also, $\left(\frac{-65}{3}\right)=1$, hence $3A=\mathfrak{p}_3\mathfrak{p}_3'$ thus there doesn't exist any prime ideal of norm $9$ ($\textbf{3.}$ Why?). Finally, $7A$ is inert, and therefore principal so $[7A]=1$

All things considered, $Cl(A)=\langle[\mathfrak{p}_2],[\mathfrak{p}_3], [\mathfrak{p}_5]\rangle$.

In addition to this, since $$N(4+\sqrt{-65})=3^4\Rightarrow(4+\sqrt{-65})A=\mathfrak{p}_3^4$$ $$N(5+\sqrt{-65})=2\cdot 3^2\cdot 5\Rightarrow(4+\sqrt{-65})A=\mathfrak{p}_2\mathfrak{p}_3^2\mathfrak{p}_5$$ and there doesn't exist any element of order $10$, $\mathfrak{p}_2\mathfrak{p}_5$ is not a principal ideal, $\mathfrak{p}_3^2$ is not principal and $\mathfrak{p}_3$ has order 4. ($\textbf{5.}$ I am not sure at all of what is going on in this paragraph, I do not follow the logic behind this).

And this is were I get stuck, when I try to find the order of each of the elements of $Cl(A)$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ See Example $6$ here for all further details. $\endgroup$ – Dietrich Burde Jan 3 '17 at 19:16
  • $\begingroup$ Answer to question $1$: see here, etc. For the question you have you need some basics of algebraic number theory, and the above text of Keith Conrad. $\endgroup$ – Dietrich Burde Jan 3 '17 at 19:18
  • $\begingroup$ My source is Samuel, who does not say that every class contains a prime ideal of norm less than $\mathscr M$, but just an ideal. Also, $13$ is ramified, though this may not affect your argument. $\endgroup$ – Lubin Jan 4 '17 at 19:15
6
$\begingroup$

Let me show you my computations: I agree that the M-bound is between $10$ and $11$, so we need only look at ideals of norm $\le10$. To make things easier for myself typographically, I’ll call $\sqrt{-65}=\rho$, our integer ring $\Bbb Z[\rho]=R$, and $C$ the class group. Since $\{1,\rho\}$ is an integral basis, the norm form is $m^2+65n^2$. Thus there are no elements of norm $2$, $3$, $5$, $6$, $7$, $8$, nor $10$.

The prime $7$ is easiest to deal with, since $\bigl(\frac{-65}7\bigr)=\bigl(\frac57\bigr)=-1$, quadratic residue symbol. which means that $(7)$ doesn’t split, i.e. is still a prime in our field, with norm $49$. (To answer your question about prime ideals having norm $p$ or $p^2$, every prime ideal $\mathfrak p$ of $R$ contracts to a prime ideal of $\Bbb Z$, so contains an integral prime $p$. If $(p)$ is prime in $R$, then it’s equal to $\mathfrak p$, and has norm $p^2$. Otherwise $p$ ramifies or splits in $R$, product of two proper ideals, each necessarily of norm $p$, and therefore prime.)

For the other primes $\le10$, $2$ ramifies and thus we have $(2)=\mathfrak p_2^2$, where we may take $\mathfrak p_2=(2,1+\rho)$.

Since $\bigl(\frac{-65}3\bigr)=\bigr(\frac13\bigl)=1$, $3$ splits, and we may write $(3)=\mathfrak p_3\overline{\mathfrak p_3}$, with $\mathfrak p_3=(3,1+\rho)$, $\overline{\mathfrak p_3}=(3,1-\rho)$, each of norm $3$ of course.

And $5$ ramifies too, with $(5)=\mathfrak p_5^2$, and we may take $\mathfrak p_5=(5,\rho)$.

To find the structure of $C$, we must determine the order (period) of $\mathfrak p_3$, and see how the two elements $\mathfrak p_2$ and $\mathfrak p_5$, both of order two, play with each other. And then see what other relations among all these there may be.

First, I claim that $\mathfrak p_3$ is of order four: $\mathfrak p_3^2=(3,1+\rho)^2=(9,3+3\rho, -64+2\rho)=(9,3+3\rho,-1+2\rho)=(9,3+3\rho,-4-\rho)$. In this last expression for $\mathfrak p_3^2$, call the second and third generators $a$ and $b$ respectively. Then since $a+3b=-9$, we have $\mathfrak p_3^2=(9,4+\rho)$. And it’s easy to see that $(9,4+\rho)^2$ is principal. Indeed, it’s equal to $(81,36+9\rho,-49+8\rho)=(81,85+\rho,-49+8\rho)=(81,4+\rho,-49+8\rho)=(4+\rho)$. So there you have two elements of $C$ of order four, since certainly $\mathfrak p_3$ and $\overline{\mathfrak p_3}$ are inverses and not equal to each other.

All right, we now are staring at four elements of order two, namely $\mathfrak p_2$, $\mathfrak p_5$, $\mathfrak p_2\mathfrak p_5$, and $\mathfrak p_3^2$. But if $C$ really is isomorphic to $\Bbb Z/(2)\oplus\Bbb Z/(4)$, there can be only three. In fact, I claim that $\mathfrak p_2\mathfrak p_5\mathfrak p_3^2$ is principal, equal to $(5-\rho)$. You can check that $\mathfrak p_2\mathfrak p_5=(2\rho,5+\rho)$, so we get: \begin{align} (2\rho,5+\rho)(9,4+\rho)&=(18\rho,45+9\rho,-130+8\rho,-45+9\rho)\\ &=(18\rho,-130+8\rho,-45+9\rho)\\ &=(18\rho,130+10\rho,-45+9\rho)\\ &=(18\rho,85+19\rho,-45+9\rho)\\ &=(18\rho,85+\rho,-45+9\rho)\\ &=(18\rho,-5+19\rho,-45+9\rho)\\ &=(18\rho,5-\rho,45-9\rho)=(5-\rho)\,, \end{align} since $18\rho$ is a multiple of $5-\rho$. It follows that $\mathfrak p_2\mathfrak p_5\sim\mathfrak p_3^2$, and I think you can work out all other relations among $\mathfrak p_2$, $\mathfrak p_3$, and $\mathfrak p_5$ that are necessary.

$\endgroup$

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.