19
$\begingroup$

This is Daniel A. Marcus, Number Fields, Exercise 2.29

If anyone can help with this problem, I'd greatly appreciate it.

Let $K$ be the biquadratic field $\mathbb Q[\sqrt{m}, \sqrt{n}] = \{a + b\sqrt{m} + c\sqrt{n} + d\sqrt{mn}: a,b,c,d \in \mathbb Q\}$, where $m$ and $n$ are distinct squarefree integers. Suppose $m$ and $n$ are relatively prime. Find an integral basis and the discriminant of $\mathcal{O}_K$ in each of the cases:

(a) $m,n \equiv 1 \pmod 4$.

(b) $m \equiv 1 \pmod 4, n \not\equiv 1 \pmod 4$.

So, I understand how to do this problem with $K$ being a quadratic field $\mathbb Q[\sqrt{m}]$. I would assume $m \equiv 1 \pmod 4$ so that $\mathcal{O}_K$ has integral basis $\{1, \frac{(1+\sqrt{m})}{2} \}$. But how would I go about it with a biquadratic field?

$\endgroup$
10
+100
$\begingroup$

Here's how we go about doing (b). First, a lemma:

Lemma 1: For $\alpha \in K$, we have that $\text{Tr}_{K/\Bbb{Q}(\alpha)}(\alpha)$ and $N_{K/\Bbb{Q}(\alpha)}(\alpha)$ being algebraic integers iff $\alpha$ is integral over $\Bbb{Z}$.

Proof: Suppose that $\alpha \in \mathcal{O}_K$. Then $\alpha$ is certainly integral over $\mathcal{O}_{\Bbb{Q}(\sqrt{m})}$ and thus its minimal $m_\alpha(t)$ polynomial has coefficients in $\mathcal{O}_{\Bbb{Q}(\sqrt{m})}$. Since $\text{Tr}_{K/\Bbb{Q}(\sqrt{m})}(\alpha) = (-1) \times \text{(coefficient of $t$})$ and $N_{K/\Bbb{Q}(\sqrt{m})}(\alpha)$ is the constant term in $m_\alpha(t)$, these are both in $\mathcal{O}_{\Bbb{Q}(\sqrt{m})}$ and thus are algebraic integers. Conversely if $T = \text{Tr}_{K/\Bbb{Q}(\sqrt{m})}(\alpha)$ and $N = N_{K/\Bbb{Q}(\sqrt{m})}(\alpha)$ are algebraic integers, $\Bbb{Z}[N,T]$ is a finitely -generated $\Bbb{Z}$ - module. Also, $\alpha$ is integral over $\mathcal{O}_{\Bbb{Q}(\sqrt{m})}$ and so $\Bbb{Z}[N,T][\alpha]$ is a finitely - generated $\Bbb{Z}[N,T]$ - module. Then $\Bbb{Z}[N,T][\alpha]$ is a finitely - generated $\Bbb{Z}$ - module and so by Proposition 5.1(c) of Atiyah - Macdonald, $\alpha$ is integral over $\Bbb{Z}$.

Proposition 1: Suppose $m \equiv 1\mod{4}$, $n \equiv k \equiv 2$ or $3 \mod{4}$. Then an integral basis for $\mathcal{O}_K$ is

$$\left\{ 1, \frac{1 + \sqrt{m}}{2},\sqrt{n},\frac{\sqrt{n} + \sqrt{k}}{2} \right\}$$

where $k = mn/(m,n)^2$.

Proof: Write down the minimal polynomial for $\alpha$ over $\Bbb{Q}(m)$. Then by the lemma we see that if $\alpha \in \mathcal{O}_K$ is of the form

$$\alpha = \frac{a + b\sqrt{m} + c \sqrt{n} + d\sqrt{k}}{2}$$

with $a,b,c,d\in\Bbb{Z}$ and $a \equiv b\mod{2}$, $c\equiv d\mod{2}$. We can rewrite $\alpha$ as

$$\begin{eqnarray*} \alpha &=& \frac{a +b\sqrt{m} - b + b + c\sqrt{n} - d\sqrt{n} +d\sqrt{n} + d\sqrt{k} }{2}\\ &=& \frac{ a-b}{2} + b\left(\frac{1 + \sqrt{m}}{2}\right) +\frac{c-d}{2}\left(\sqrt{n}\right) + d\left(\frac{\sqrt{n} + \sqrt{k}}{2}\right)\end{eqnarray*}$$

Since $\frac{a-b}{2}$ and $\frac{c-d}{2}$ are arbitrary integers this concludes the proof of the proposition. Now that you have an integral basis, you only need to calculate the determinant of a $4 \times 4$ matrix to get the discriminant of $\mathcal{O}_K$.

Note to user: Since this is a homework problem I have left out some details. Among the details you need to fill in are:

  1. How did I get that $\alpha$ must be of the form prescribed above?

  2. How does my calculation in the proposition show that what I claimed is an integral basis for $\mathcal{O}_K$?

You are urged to fill them in and follow my method to do (a).

$\endgroup$
7
$\begingroup$

fpqc's answer is absolutely fine! But I want to point out another solution which works in this case.

In what follows, $K, L \subseteq \overline{\mathbf Q}$ are linearly disjoint number fields, so we have a canonical isomorphism $K \otimes_{\mathbf Q} L \cong KL$.

Claim: Under these hypotheses, the discriminant $\mathfrak d_{KL}$ divides $\mathfrak d_K^s\mathfrak d_L^r$, where $s=[L:\mathbf Q]$ and $r=[K:\mathbf Q]$. Moreover, if the discriminants $\mathfrak d_K$ and $\mathfrak d_L$ are relatively prime in $\mathbf Z$, then $\mathfrak d_{KL} = \mathfrak d_K^s\mathfrak d_L^r$, and the canonical injection of $\mathbf Z$-modules $\mathcal O_K \otimes_{\mathbf Z} \mathcal O_L \hookrightarrow \mathcal O_{KL}$ is an isomorphism (in particular, bases for $\mathcal O_K$ and $\mathcal O_L$ give a basis of $\mathcal O_{KL}$ in the obvious way).

Proof: (With A. Fiori) Let $M$ be the image of $\mathcal O_K \otimes_{\mathbf Z} \mathcal O_L$ in $\mathcal O_{KL}$. Then $M$ is an order of $\mathcal O_{KL}$. If $x=ab \in \mathcal O_{KL}$ is the image of a pure tensor $a \otimes b$, then the trace form on $KL$ acts on $x$ by $T_{KL}(ab) = T_{K}(a) T_{L}(b)$ (to prove this, reduce to the case where $K$ and $L$ are Galois and use the canonical isomorphism $\text{Gal}(KL/\mathbf Q) \simeq \text{Gal}(K/\mathbf Q) \times \text{Gal}(L/\mathbf Q)$ provided by linear disjointness). In other words, $T_{KL}$ acts on $M$ as $T_K \otimes_\mathbf Z T_L$. By picking a basis $\{a_1, \dots, a_r\}$ for $\mathcal O_K$ and $\{b_1, \dots, b_s\}$ for $\mathcal O_L$, it follows that the matrix for $T_{KL}$ on $M$ is the Kronecker product of the matrices for $T_K$ and $T_L$, and thus its determinant is $\mathfrak d_K^s\mathfrak d_L^r$. It follows that $\mathfrak d_{KL}$ divides $\mathfrak d_K^s\mathfrak d_L^r$. By considering the towers $\mathbf Q \subseteq K \subseteq KL$ and $\mathbf Q \subseteq L \subseteq KL$, we know also that $\mathfrak d_{KL}$ is divisible by $\mathfrak d_K^s$ and $\mathfrak d_L^r$, hence the assertion that $\mathfrak d_{KL} = \mathfrak d_K^s\mathfrak d_L^r$ if $\mathfrak d_K$ and $\mathfrak d_L$ are coprime. It follows in this case that $M=\mathcal O_{KL}$.

(This applies in both cases (a) and (b), since the discriminants are $m$ and $n$ in the first case, and $m$ and $4n$ in the second, which are relatively prime because $m$ and $n$ are, and because $m$ is odd.)

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Dear Bruno, Thank you for your answer. I had committed for the additional bounty intending it to go to BenjaLim. In fact I was surprised when it came up that I had to wait 23 hours. Naively, I never expected another answer. To be honest, your answer is over my head. But that is irrelevant. I feel an ethical responsibility, in that I would never explicitly or implicitly ask anyone to do anything for naught. And even if I could, I would be reluctant to differentiate between such answers. That being the case, I will leave it up to you: I will post another 50 point bounty intended to you if you... $\endgroup$ – user12802 Feb 18 '13 at 3:34
  • $\begingroup$ like. Please do not hesitate to tell me what you think. Meantime, I have to go to bed and will check first thing in the AM. Hope I don't get any more answers. P.S. Love the cartoon. Best regards, Andrew $\endgroup$ – user12802 Feb 18 '13 at 3:37
  • $\begingroup$ Dear @Andrew : I wrote this answer knowing that you had already awarded the bounty, and I certainly don't hold you responsible for it. You did more than your part already by offering the bounty and bringing this question to my attention - so thank you! Best regards, $\endgroup$ – Bruno Joyal Feb 18 '13 at 3:58
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Bruno +1 For your solution, a real thermonuclear weapon! Do continue to post answers on math.se as I can't express how much I learned from this answer! $\endgroup$ – user38268 Feb 18 '13 at 13:09
  • $\begingroup$ @Dear BenjaLim: Thank you, I am glad you enjoyed it! Regards, $\endgroup$ – Bruno Joyal Feb 18 '13 at 17:12

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.