Let $K=\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{d})$ where $d \neq 0,1$ is a squarefree integer.

Let $a \in \mathbb{Z}$. Prove that if neither $a$ nor $-a$ are squares modulo $d$, then no integral ideal in $K$ of norm $a$ is principal.

Hint: Consider cases disk $K=d$ and disc $K=4d$.

For the case disk $K=d$, we have $\mathbb{Z}_k=\mathbb{Z}[\alpha]$ where $\alpha=\frac{1+\sqrt{d}}{2}$. The norm of a general element $x+y\alpha$ is $(x+y/2)^2-d(y/2)^2$.

I suppose $(d/a)=-1$. I am now stuck. Any help?


It doesn't actually matter if $a$ is prime in $\mathbb Z$ or not. Under the conditions you've specified, $x^2 - dy^2 = \pm a$ has no solutions, which means that in the domain at hand, $N(z) = \pm a$ is impossible. Clearly $N(\pm a) = a^2$, and therefore $N(\langle a \rangle) = a^2$ as well.

We don't really need to worry about the cases $4a$, $-4a$ either. That's because $4$ is pretty much always a square in whatever ring it exists in. Thus, if $a$ is a square, then $4a$ is as well.

So, for example, in $\mathcal O_{\mathbb Q(\sqrt{65})}$, since neither $3$ nor $62$ are squares modulo $65$, we don't actually have to check that $12$ and $53$ aren't either.

  • 3
    $\begingroup$ A good comparison, in my opinion, would be $a = 10$. See that $25, 40, 55$ are also squares, and $$\left(\frac{5}{2} - \frac{\sqrt{65}}{2}\right) \left(\frac{5}{2} - \frac{\sqrt{65}}{2}\right) = -10.$$ $\endgroup$ – Mr. Brooks Mar 4 '17 at 22:30

So $a$ is a purely real, rational integer. Is $a$ a prime in $\textbf Z$? Let's say that it is. It's certainly irreducible in $K$, since, as you've figured out, $$\left(\frac{d}{a}\right) = -1.$$ Given that the relation $x^2 \equiv d \pmod a$ has no solutions, that guarantees that $a$ is also prime in $K$. This means that a number with a norm of $a$ is nonexistent in $K$, since $N(a) = a^2$.

Concrete example: $d = 10$, $a = 7$. Try to solve $x^2 \equiv 7 \pmod{10}$, you can't. Nor can you solve $x^2 \equiv 3 \pmod{10}$. More importantly, though, $x^2 \equiv 10 \pmod 7$ has no solution either. Therefore no number $x \in \textbf Z[\sqrt{10}]$ satisfies $N(x) = \pm 7$, and $N(7) = 49$.

Compare $a = 3$. You also come up empty on $x^2 \equiv 3 \pmod{10}$ and $x^2 \equiv 7 \pmod{10}$. But $x^2 = 10 \pmod 3$ does have solutions, the most obvious one being $x = 1$, leading you to find the ideals $\langle 3, 1 - \sqrt{10} \rangle$ and $\langle 3, 1 + \sqrt{10} \rangle$, neither of which is principal.


Your hypotheses are a bit muddled. On the one hand you assume that $\pm a$ is not a square mod $d$ , and on the other you write $(d/a) = -1$, i.e., if $a$ is prime, that $d$ is not a square mod $a$. So let us try to clear up the necessary requirements as we go along.

First you speak of ideals $I$ of the ring of integers $A$ of your quadratic field $K = \mathbf Q (\sqrt d)$ with norm $a \in \mathbf Z$. There are at least two definitions of $N(I)$. The first one is $N(I)$ is the order of the quotient $A/I$, which implies that $a$ must be a natural integer.

If you consider $a \in \mathbf Z$, then the definition should be: $N(I)$ and $a$ generate the same ideal in $\mathbf Z$, in which case the sign of $a$ becomes irrelevant. But then you could also consider the ideals generated in $A$, in which case the definition becomes $aA$ is the product of all the distinct Galois conjugates of $I$, see the answer to this question about norms and ideals.

Let us stick to the latter definition. Because the norm is multiplicative, we can assume that $a$ is a rational prime $p$. Then the theory of the decomposition of primes in a quadratic field tells you that $p$ is a norm iff $p$ splits, i.e. $pA = P.P'$, where $P$ and $P'$ are two conjugate prime ideals of $A$, if and only if $(d/p) = 1$ if $p$ is odd, and $d \equiv 1 \bmod 8$ if $p=2$. At this stage :

  • if your main hypothesis is $(d/p) = -1$ for $p$ odd, then the case $p = 2$ requires further examination. The point is that $A$ does not necessarily coincide with $B = \mathbf Z [\sqrt d]$ (see the hint on $\textrm{disc}(K)$). An easy calculation shows that $A/pA = B/pB$ if $p$ is odd, but the case $p = 2$ requires more tedious computation to obtain the criterion that $2$ splits if and only if $d \equiv 1$ mod $8$. Anyway, it remains in this case to check that the prime ideals above $2$ cannot be principal.

  • if your main hypothesis is that $\pm p$ is not a square mod $d$, then a direct calculation of norms of elements solves the problem, as in the shortcut given by @Lisa. But of course the long detour that we made was only meant to clear up your assumptions and understand what is going on.


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.