Let $p$ be an odd prime. Then by Hensel's lemma it's clear that $\mathbb{Z}_p $ contains all $(p-1)^{th}$ root of unity which reduces to $1$, $2$, ... , $p-1$ in $\mathbb{F}_p$.

My question is do we know what they look like? What I mean is do we know what they look like in the form $\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty {a_np^n}$ where $\{a_n\}$ is somewhat nice sequence.

Or do we not need to know? What I am really interested in is the galois extension $\mathbb{Q}_p\{\mu_{p^\infty}\} /\mathbb{Q}_p$ which has galois group $\mathbb{Z}_p^\times =\mu_{p-1} \times 1+ p\mathbb{Z}_p \cong \mathbb{Z}/(p-1)\mathbb{Z} \times \mathbb{Z}_p$ and the field fixed by $\mu_{p-1}$. And of course by $\mathbb{Q}_p\{\mu_{p^\infty}\}$ I mean the field obtained by adjoining all $p$-power roots of unity onto $\mathbb{Q}_p$.

It's first time posting a question here so let me know if I broke a rule or asked in a way it is really bad to understand. Thanks!

Edit $1$

I tried explicitly computing it for low $p$ and I do not see any nice patterns. Although this could be because I haven't iterated it too many times. Any software or program I could use to compute the roots of unity of this form easily? I am not good at programming in general though.


No, they’re irrational, so there’s certainly no pattern in the digits of the standard $p$-ary expansion.

There are several ways to calculate the roots of unity explicitly. Here’s a brilliantly easy, but slow way: take your integer $n$ with $1<n<p-1$, and just successively raise it to the $p$-th power. That is, perform $z\mapsto z^p$ repeatedly, starting with $z=n$. You get one more digit per iteration.

One of the quickest ways is to use Newton-Raphson, which you must know from Calculus. You’re solving $X^{p-1}-1=0$, starting with your first guess $n$ with, as before, $1<n<p-1$. Your first error is $n^{p-1}-1$, and you divide this by the derivative of your function $(p-1)X^{p-2}$, evaluated at $n$. The quotient is your correction, and you subtract this from your first guess of $n$. That givew you your next approximation. I could write the formulas down, but they’re precisely what you read in your calculus text. Anyhow, you get twice as much accuracy in each iteration. I just did it for $i\in\mathbb Z_5$, and got 30 digits with 5 iterations. (Makes sense, since $2^5>30$.)

There’s a way of using the Binomial Expansion of $(1+X)^a$, and it can be used for finding $m$-th roots of other numbers than $1$, but it’s no faster-converging than the first method I suggested, and of course much more difficult computationally.

  • $\begingroup$ I was using the first way you mentioned to find the p-adic expansion and it was certainly slow and I was finding absolutely no patterns. How could you prove that they are 'irrational'? Also I haven't quite noticed that Newton-Raphson could be used and it's quite nice. It would have saved me lots of time if I knew it before. $\endgroup$ – Jack Yoon Apr 14 '14 at 23:47
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Other than $1$ and $-1$, the roots of unity are not rational numbers. You can prove that. $\endgroup$ – Lubin Apr 15 '14 at 3:51
  • $\begingroup$ "they’re irrational, so there’s certainly no pattern in the digits of the standard p-ary expansion" -- hmm. 0.101001000100001000001... is irrational, and so would be the p-adic number $\sum a_n p^n$ with $a_n=1$ for $n=1,3,6,10,15 ...$, $a_n=0$ otherwise, but I would not say there is no pattern in the digits in this expansion. $\endgroup$ – Torsten Schoeneberg Jan 9 '17 at 5:52

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.