The quotient ring $\mathbb{Z}[x] / \langle (x^2 + 1)^2 \rangle$ was brought up in class today to contrast it with $\mathbb{Z}[x] / \langle x^2 + 1 \rangle$ after a discussion about adjoining elements to rings. That is, the second quotient ring given here is of course isomorphic to $\mathbb{Z}[i]$. We are adjoining $i$ to $\mathbb{Z}$ because $i$ satisfies $x^2 + 1 = 0$. However, $i$ also satisfies $(x^2 + 1)^2 = 0$. But surely $\mathbb{Z}[x] / \langle (x^2 + 1)^2 \rangle \not\cong \mathbb{Z}[x] / \langle x^2 + 1 \rangle$. So is $\mathbb{Z}[x] / \langle (x^2 + 1)^2 \rangle$ isomorphic to some familiar ring?

I've tried to think of some homomorphisms from $\mathbb{Z}[x]$ to other rings (e.g. $\mathbb{Z}[i] \times \mathbb{Z}[i]$) trying to get a kernel of $\langle (x^2 + 1)^2 \rangle$, but no luck. Intuitively, it seems like we are "adjoining $i$ twice", to get a sort of $4$ dimensional structure, as compared to $\mathbb{Z}[i]$ which is like a $2$ dimensional structure.

EDIT: A thought: perhaps the quotient is isomorphic to the Lipschitz quaternions? I can't seem to prove this claim.

  • $\begingroup$ You are adjoining a nonzero square root of zero, which we could call $\tilde{0}$. Also, you are adjoining a number we could call $\tilde{\imath}$, which is a square root of $-1+\tilde{0}$. $\endgroup$ – alex.jordan Feb 1 '14 at 1:04
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Regarding your edit, I don't think you can find any square roots of $-1$ in your ring, or square roots of $0$ in the Lipschitz quaternions. Indeed the latter lacks zero divisors...and isn't even commutative! $\endgroup$ – Kevin Carlson Feb 1 '14 at 1:10
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Kevin: How interesting! $(1/2) x (x^2 + 3)$ is a square root of $-1$, but alas that lies in the ring of fractions, not in the ring itself! $\endgroup$ – Hurkyl Feb 1 '14 at 1:28
  • $\begingroup$ ... so we can get an alternate characterization of this ring as $$\mathbb{Z}[2i][x] / \langle x^2 - 2ix - 1 \rangle $$ $\endgroup$ – Hurkyl Feb 1 '14 at 1:36
  • $\begingroup$ Very related: math.stackexchange.com/questions/414831 $\endgroup$ – Martin Brandenburg Feb 1 '14 at 10:04

The ring

$$ \mathbb{Q}[x] / (x^2 + 1)^2 $$

is much easier to understand: with some work (e.g. Newton's method), we can discover that it contains a square root of unity:

$$ i := \frac{1}{2} x (x^2 + 3) $$

We can rewrite the ring as

$$ \mathbb{Q}(i)[x] / (x - i)^2 $$

This ring has an evident square root of zero (see the "dual numbers"), which I will call $e$. So this ring is simply

$$\mathbb{Q}[i, e]$$

The image of $x$ in this ring is $i+e$. We can verify that we get a homomorphism by expanding to check

$$ ((i+e)^2 + 1)^2 = 0$$

This ring can't be written as a product of rings: if we try to solve for idempotents

$$ (a + be)^2 = (a + be) $$

where $a,b \in \mathbb{Q}(i)$, the only solutions are $b=0$ and $a=0,1$.

Going back to the original ring, we can write

$$ \mathbb{Z}[x] / (x^2 + 1)^2 \cong \mathbb{Z}[i + e] $$

Of course, maybe this doesn't qualify as a 'familiar' ring....

  • $\begingroup$ (+1) Very cool. That ring isn't familiar to me (I'm sure it is to someone), but it is still satisfying that there is a tangible ring to point to. Thanks! $\endgroup$ – tylerc0816 Feb 1 '14 at 3:04
  • $\begingroup$ Ah, that's great. $\endgroup$ – Kevin Carlson Feb 1 '14 at 9:49
  • $\begingroup$ Since $\mathbb{Q}(i,e)$ is not a field, I would choose another notation. $\endgroup$ – Martin Brandenburg Feb 1 '14 at 10:09
  • $\begingroup$ If $k$ is a commutative ring with $2 \in k^*$, then there is an isomorphism of $k$-algebras $k[x]/(x^2+1)^2 \cong k[i,e]/(i^2+1,e^2)$. See math.stackexchange.com/questions/414831 for a proof. $\endgroup$ – Martin Brandenburg Feb 1 '14 at 10:11
  • $\begingroup$ @Martin: Thanks. I had typed $\mathbb{Q}[i,e]$, but accidentally went through the habit of changing the $[]$ to $()$. :( $\endgroup$ – Hurkyl Feb 1 '14 at 19:14

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.