I'm trying to show $\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{-31}]$ has three distinct ideal classes, but something keeps going wrong and I can only find the identity and one other class.

I found $|d_{K}| = 31$ because $-31 \equiv 1 \bmod 4$, and using Minkowski's Bound I computed $\frac{1}{2} \frac{4}{\pi} \sqrt{31} < 4$, so I need only check primes 2 and 3 (I feel like this is where I may be missing something).

$\langle 2 \rangle$ splits into $\left\langle 2, \frac{1 \pm \sqrt{-31}}{2} \right\rangle$ which I can show is not principal by considering the norm of an arbitrary element needs to equal $2$ $\implies$ $N(\alpha) = N\left(\frac{a + b\sqrt{-31}}{2}\right) = \frac{a^{2} + 31b^{2}}{4} \neq 2$.

My problems is with $\langle 3 \rangle$ because it is prime in $\mathcal{O}_{K}$ due to $-31$ not being congruent to a square modulo $3$. Thus $\langle 3 \rangle$ is equivalent to the identity in the ideal class group, therefore the ideal class group has only two classes.

Can anyone see where I am making a mistake? Your comments would be much appreciated. Thanks for reading.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I think the two ideals $(2,\frac{1\pm\sqrt{-31}}{2})$ belong to different classes? Or maybe I miss some element $\alpha\in\mathcal O_K$ such that $(2,\frac{1+\sqrt{-31}}{2})\cdot(\alpha)=(2,\frac{1-\sqrt{-31}}{2})$? $\endgroup$ – awllower Nov 12 '17 at 17:10
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you! I never considered that. I kept thinking the prime factors had to be in the same class. $\endgroup$ – SneakyHobbit Nov 12 '17 at 17:31

As awllower points out, $\mathfrak{p}=(2,\frac12(1+\sqrt{-31}))$ and $\mathfrak{p}'=(2,\frac12(1-\sqrt{-31}))$ are in different ideal classes. Clearly $\mathfrak{p}\mathfrak{p}'=(2)$ so $[\mathfrak{p}]$ and $[\mathfrak{p}']$ are inverse classes. Also as there is no norm $2$ element in the ring of integers, each is non-principal. But $(\frac12(1+\sqrt{-31}))=\mathfrak{p}^3$ as this ideal has norm $8$ and cannot be divisible by $\mathfrak{p}'$. Thus $[\mathfrak{p}]$ is an ideal class of order $3$ in the classgroup and $[\mathfrak{p}']=[\mathfrak{p}]^{-1}=[\mathfrak{p}]^2$.

  • $\begingroup$ Awesome, thank you very much. I kept thinking the two factors were in the same class. This makes a lot of sense though. $\endgroup$ – SneakyHobbit Nov 12 '17 at 17:32
  • $\begingroup$ Could you explain why it is that $p'$ doesn't divide $p^3$? (not sure how to type a gothic p) $\endgroup$ – SneakyHobbit Nov 12 '17 at 17:49
  • $\begingroup$ @celticburns, Well $\mathfrak p$ certainly does, and if $\mathfrak p'$ did so too then so would $(2)=\mathfrak p\mathfrak p'$. $\endgroup$ – Lord Shark the Unknown Nov 12 '17 at 17:57
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @JackD'Aurizio Looks like you listed four there.... $a^2+ab+8b^2$ and $a^2-ab+8b^2$ are properly equivalent ... the latter is not reduced by the usual definition. $2a^2+ab+4b^2$ and $2a^2-ab+4b^2$ are not properly equivalent, and neither are equivalent to $a^2+ab+8b^2$. Both are reduced. So of the four forms you list, three are reduced. In general I would counsel against believing Wolfram's web pages; there are errors on the web-page cited. In particular it classifies the wrong class as positive definite. $\endgroup$ – Lord Shark the Unknown Nov 12 '17 at 18:19
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @JackD'Aurizio In case of interest, I recommend Buell, Binary Quadratic Forms. He does a good job of relating forms and quadratic fields. Also, while he is consistent with older texts, he does very well on forms with odd $ab$ coefficient. For this specific question, recommend Hudson and Williams on class number three, zakuski.utsa.edu/~jagy/Hudson_Williams_1991.pdf $\endgroup$ – Will Jagy Nov 12 '17 at 19:23

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.