Let $F$ be a finite field. .How do I prove that the order of $F$ is always of order $p^n$ where $p$ is prime?

  • 2
    What is the cardinality of any finite-dimensional vector space over the field with $p$ elements? – NKS Oct 15 '11 at 17:50
  • What exactly is the scalar field and the multiplication law? – Mohan Oct 15 '11 at 18:14
  • The scalar field is the subfield consisting of the elements $0$, $1$, $1+1$, $1+1+1$, $1+1+1+1$ and so forth. (You first have to prove this is in fact a subfield, of course). Multiplication is whatever passes for multiplication in the finite field. – Henning Makholm Oct 15 '11 at 18:37
  • First prove that if $charF=p $ then $F_p$ is a subfield of $F$. – Frank Murphy Oct 15 '11 at 19:27
  • The answers to this question contain all the information that you need. IOW this is almost an exact duplicate. – Jyrki Lahtonen Oct 16 '11 at 6:17
up vote 36 down vote accepted
  1. Prove that the smallest multiple $m$ of 1 that gives zero has to be a prime. (Otherwise there are divisors of $m$ which are then divisors of zero.)

  2. Prove that a field is a vector space over a subfield.

  3. Count the elements of the field if the dimension of this vector space is $n$.

Let $p$ be the characteristic of a finite field $F$. Then since $1$ has order $p$ in $(F,+)$, we know that $p$ divides $|F|$. Now let $q\neq p$ be any other prime dividing $|F|$. Then by Cauchy's Theorem, there is an element $x\in F$ whose order in $(F,+)$ is $q$.

Then $q\cdot x=0$. But we also have $p\cdot x=0$. Now since $p$ and $q$ are relatively prime, we can find integers $a$ and $b$ such that $ap+bq=1$.

Thus $(ap+bq)\cdot x=x$. But $(ap+bq)\cdot x=a\cdot(p\cdot x)+b\cdot(q\cdot x)=0$, giving $x=0$, which is not possible since $x$ has positive order in $(F,+)$.

So there is no prime other than $p$ which divides $|F|$.

  • 3
    I like this argument better than the vector space one. Surprising that it has so little attention. – R R May 7 '15 at 17:38
  • why $(ap+bq)\cdot x = a \cdot (p \cdot x) + b \cdot (q \cdot x)?$ thanks! – scitamehtam Aug 27 '15 at 5:26
  • 3
    @scitamehtam An inductive argument should easily settle that $(m+n)\cdot x=m\cdot x+n\cdot x$ for all integers $m$ and $n$ and any $x\in F$. Further, an inductive argument can be used to settle $(mn)\cdot x= m\cdot(n\cdot x)$ for all integers $m$ and $n$ and $x\in F$. I guess the source of the confusion is probably the fact that here the '$\cdot$' does not denote the multiplication in $F$. It is simply a notation that if $m$ is a positive integer, then $m\cdot x$ is $x$ summed $m$ times. If $m$ is negative then $m\cdot x:=(-m)\cdot x$. If $m=0$ then $m\cdot x=0$. – caffeinemachine Aug 27 '15 at 7:06
  • A very nice proof, thanks for sharing. – user136361 Feb 6 '17 at 22:44
  • 3
    After the first paragraph, can’t you just argue: In the equation $x+…+x=0$ ($q$ $x$s) factor out $x$ to get $x(1+…+1)=0$. Since we’re in a field we know that $x^{-1}$ exists so multiply it to both sides to get $1+…+1=0$ ($q$ $1$s). But we know that the order of $1$ in $(F,+)$ is $p$, hence $p|q$. – Coffee_Table Nov 19 '17 at 0:19

Let $F$ be a finite field. Then the underlying additive group of the field (let's denote this by $F^+$) has this interesting property:

For every two non-identity (i.e. non-zero) elements $a$ and $b\in F^+$, there is an automorphism $\phi$ of the additive group such that $\phi(a)=b$.

This can be seen by examining the map $(x\mapsto ba^{-1}x)$.

This means the set of automorphisms of $F^+$ act transitively on $F^+$. Since automorphisms permute elements of the same order, we can conclude that every element in $F$ has the same order.

But a finite group in which all non-identity elements have the same order is necessarily a $p$-group such that every element has prime order. This can be shown by Cauchy's Theorem.

Suppose the order of $F^+$ had two distinct prime factors $p$ and $q$. Then $F^+$ would contain an element of order $p$ and another element of order $q$ by Cauchy's Theorem. This contradicts that every element has the same order. So the order of $F$ is indeed a prime-power. Cauchy's Theorem implies that $F$ has an element of order $p$, thus all elements have order $p$ by the hypothesis.

So, $F$ must be of prime-power order $p^n$, and we have that $px=0$ for all $x\in F$.

A slight variation on caffeinmachine's answer that I prefer, because I think it shows more of the structure of what's going on:

Let $F$ be a finite field (and thus has characteristic $p$, a prime).

  1. Every element of $F$ has order $p$ in the additive group $(F,+)$. So $(F,+)$ is a $p$-group.
  2. A group is a $p$-group iff it has order $p^n$ for some positive integer $n$.

The first claim is immediate, by the distributive property of the field. Let $x \in F, \ x \neq 0_F$. We have

\begin{align} p \cdot x &= p \cdot (1_{F} x) = (p \cdot 1_{F}) \ x \\ & = 0 \end{align}

This is the smallest positive integer for which this occurs, by the definition of the characteristic of a field. So $x$ has order $p$.

The part that we need of the second claim is a well-known corollary of Cauchy's theorem (the reverse direction is just an application of Lagrange's theorem).

Your Answer

 

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.