Every finite division ring is a field: Difference between revisions

From Groupprops
Line 38: Line 38:
| 2 || <math>L</math> is a field under the operations induced from <math>K</math>, and the multiplicative group <math>L^*</math> (the nonzero elements of <math>L</math>) is the center of <math>K^*</math>. || || <math>K</math> is a division ring || || <toggledisplay><math>L</math> is an additive subgroup of <math>K</math> because of the distributivity laws relating addition and multiplication. By definition, the nonzero elements of <math>L</math> are the center of the multiplicative group <math>K^*</math>. The center of a group is an abelian subgroup, so the nonzero elements of <math>L</math> form a commutative subgroup of <math>K^*</math>, hence <math>L</math> is a field under the induced operations.</toggledisplay> || Creation of base field (<math>L</math>) for which many of the additive structures of interest are vector spaces
| 2 || <math>L</math> is a field under the operations induced from <math>K</math>, and the multiplicative group <math>L^*</math> (the nonzero elements of <math>L</math>) is the center of <math>K^*</math>. || || <math>K</math> is a division ring || || <toggledisplay><math>L</math> is an additive subgroup of <math>K</math> because of the distributivity laws relating addition and multiplication. By definition, the nonzero elements of <math>L</math> are the center of the multiplicative group <math>K^*</math>. The center of a group is an abelian subgroup, so the nonzero elements of <math>L</math> form a commutative subgroup of <math>K^*</math>, hence <math>L</math> is a field under the induced operations.</toggledisplay> || Creation of base field (<math>L</math>) for which many of the additive structures of interest are vector spaces
|-
|-
| 3 || <math>K</math> is a vector space over <math>L</math> where the additive structure is the same as that for <math>K</math> as a skew field and where the action of elements of <math>L</math> is by left multiplication. || || || Step (2) || <toggledisplay>The linearity follows from distributivity of multiplication.</toggledisplay> || Linear consolidation over <math>L</math>
| 3 || <math>K</math> is a vector space over <math>L</math> where the additive structure is the same as that for <math>K</math> as a division ring and where the action of elements of <math>L</math> is by left multiplication. || || || Step (2) || <toggledisplay>The linearity follows from distributivity of multiplication.</toggledisplay> || Linear consolidation over <math>L</math>
|-
|-
| 4 || If <math>L</math> has size <math>q > 1</math>, <math>K</math> has size <math>q^d</math> for some positive integer <math>d</math>, where <math>d</math> is the dimension of <math>K</math> as a vector space over <math>L</math>. || || <math>K</math> is finite || Step (3) || <toggledisplay>Since <math>K</math> is finite, so is <math>L</math>, so <math>L</math> has some size <math>q > 1</math> (since there is no field with one element). Next, since <math>K</math> is finite, it must be finite-dimensional as a vector space over <math>L</math>. If its dimension is <math>d</math>, it is in bijection with the vector space <math>L^d</math> obtained by taking a direct sum of <math>d</math> copies of <math>L</math>. Hence its size must be <math>q^d</math>.</toggledisplay> || Linear consolidation over <math>L</math>, introducing numerical constraints. Note that <math>q</math> must in fact be a prime power, but we only use here that <math>q > 1</math>.
| 4 || If <math>L</math> has size <math>q > 1</math>, <math>K</math> has size <math>q^d</math> for some positive integer <math>d</math>, where <math>d</math> is the dimension of <math>K</math> as a vector space over <math>L</math>. || || <math>K</math> is finite || Step (3) || <toggledisplay>Since <math>K</math> is finite, so is <math>L</math>, so <math>L</math> has some size <math>q > 1</math> (since there is no field with one element). Next, since <math>K</math> is finite, it must be finite-dimensional as a vector space over <math>L</math>. If its dimension is <math>d</math>, it is in bijection with the vector space <math>L^d</math> obtained by taking a direct sum of <math>d</math> copies of <math>L</math>. Hence its size must be <math>q^d</math>.</toggledisplay> || Linear consolidation over <math>L</math>, introducing numerical constraints. Note that <math>q</math> must in fact be a prime power, but we only use here that <math>q > 1</math>.

Revision as of 05:49, 29 August 2026

History

This result was first proved by Wedderburn.

Statement

Every finite division ring is a field, and hence, a finite field. Here, by division ring, we mean associative division ring.

Related facts

Stronger facts

Facts used

  1. Lagrange's theorem
  2. Class equation of a group

Proof

This proof uses a tabular format for presentation. Provide feedback on tabular proof formats in a survey (opens in new window/tab) | Learn more about tabular proof formats|View all pages on facts with proofs in tabular format

Given: A division ring K of finite size.

To prove: K is a field.

Proof': We denote by K* the multiplicative group of nonzero elements of K.

The key idea behind the proof is to switch between the additive/linear structure and the multiplicative structure. For the additive structure, we use the key fact that the size of a vector space over a field is a power of the size of the field. For the multiplicative structure, we use Lagrange's theorem (a multiplicative constraint) and the class equation (a combinatorial constraint on how things should add up). Finally, we show that the number theory does not work out.

Step no. Assertion/construction Facts used Given data used Previous steps used Explanation Commentary
1 Let L be the center of K, i.e., the subset of K comprising those elements that commute multiplicatively with every element of K.
2 L is a field under the operations induced from K, and the multiplicative group L* (the nonzero elements of L) is the center of K*. K is a division ring [SHOW MORE] Creation of base field (L) for which many of the additive structures of interest are vector spaces
3 K is a vector space over L where the additive structure is the same as that for K as a division ring and where the action of elements of L is by left multiplication. Step (2) [SHOW MORE] Linear consolidation over L
4 If L has size q>1, K has size qd for some positive integer d, where d is the dimension of K as a vector space over L. K is finite Step (3) [SHOW MORE] Linear consolidation over L, introducing numerical constraints. Note that q must in fact be a prime power, but we only use here that q>1.
5 For an element g∈K, define CK(g) to be the set of elements of K that commute with g. Then, CK(g) is a subspace of K as a L-vector space. It contains L and has dimension r and size qr for 1≤r≤d. Further, if g∉L, then 1<r<d (r depends on g). Step (4) [SHOW MORE] Linear consolidation over L
6 For g∈K∖L, the centralizer of g in the multiplicative group K* has size qr−1 for 1<r<d (r depends on g). Step (5) For the multiplicative group, we need to throw out the zero element. Conversion of linear/additive constraint to constraint on multiplicative group
7 The class equation of K* is: qd−1=(q−1)+∑i=1sqd−1qri−1 where r1,r2,…,rs are dimensions over L of the centralizers in K of representatives of conjugacy classes in K* of non-central elements. For each i, we have 1<ri<d. Fact (2) Steps (2) -- (6) This is a direct application of the construction of the class equation. Combinatorial constraint on multiplicative group
8 Each ri divides d. Fact (1) Steps (2), (3), (6) [SHOW MORE] Combination of linearly arising multiplicative constraints with basic number theory to get further constraints
9 Let A=Φd(q) where Φd is the cyclotomic polynomial with parameter d. Then, as an integer, A divides qd−1 as well as each of the quotient (qd−1)/(qri−1) appearing in step (7). Steps (7), (8) [SHOW MORE] Pure cyclotomic polynomial theory (number theory/algebra)
10 If d>1, then A=Φd(q) does not divide q−1. [SHOW MORE] Pure cyclotomic polynomial theory (number theory/algebra)
11 We can conclude d=1, so K=L and K is a field. Steps (7), (9), (10) [SHOW MORE] Demonstration of irreconcilability of constraints derived from linear structure and constraints arising from cyclotomic polynomial theory