“up to associates” in the Euclidean domain

“up to associates” in the Euclidean domain



We know that the Euclidean Domain has the property of Unique Factorization.



More precisely, every nonzero element in a Euclidean ring $R$ can be uniquely written (up to associates) as a product of prime elements or is a unit in $R$.



The word "up to associates" confusing me a bit.



P.S. Let's consider the example in the euclidean domain $mathbbZ[i]$ and consider the following prime factorizations such as: $$(2+i)(1+i) quadtextand quad (-1+2i)(1-i)$$
Note that $2+isim -1+2i$ and $1+isim 1-i$.



Can anyone explain me the meaning of the phrase "up to associates" in the above example, please?





Related : math.stackexchange.com/questions/1933073/…
– Arnaud D.
Aug 27 at 16:16





If $ab$ is one prime factorization, then for any unit $u$, we can get another prime factorization $(au)(u^-1b)$, So the factorization is only unique except for ("up to") the replacement of $a$ by the associate $au$ and $b$ by the corresponding associate $u^-1b$, where $u$ is any unit. In your example, $a=2+i$, $b = 1+i$, and $u=i$.
– Bungo
Aug 27 at 16:19





3 Answers
3



Uniqueness of factorization up to associates means that if $rin R$, nonzero and not a unit, is written as
$$
r = p_1p_2dots p_m = q_1q_2dots q_n
$$
with $p_i$ and $q_j$ irreducible, then



Two elements $a$ and $b$ are associate if there is a unit $u$ with $b=ua$.



This happens also in the integers: for instance, $6=2cdot3=(-3)(-2)$.



In your case, $2+i$ is associate to $-1+2i$ and $1+i$ is associate to $1-i$.





Let's consider another example: $(2+i)(1+i)$ and $(-1+2i)(1+i)$. Are these prime factorizations equal? Since $2+isim -1+2i$ and 1+isim 1+i$.
– RFZ
Aug 27 at 18:02





@RFZ The products are different. They're factorizations of associate elements.
– egreg
Aug 27 at 19:36






Hmm Thanks! I was thinking that uniqueness of factorization up to associates is something like that: for example, we have two primes $pi_1, pi_2$ then $pi_1pi_2$ is the same as $upi_1pi_2$ where $u$ - some unit of $R$.
– RFZ
Aug 27 at 19:50






In other words, if we have one factorization into primes and we multiply it by some unit $u$ then these two factorizations are the same!
– RFZ
Aug 27 at 19:51





@RFZ Not really; say $r=pq$, with $p$ and $q$ irreducible; if $u$ is a unit, then $r=(pu)(qu^-1)$ is another factorization, but the factors are associate to the ones in the other factorization.
– egreg
Aug 27 at 20:10



This means the prime factors are determined only up to a unit factor. Indeed in the Gaussian integers, the group of units is $;1,-1,i,-i$ and indeed
$$2+i=(-i)(-1+2i),qquad 1+i=i(1-i).$$
We have the same situation in $mathbf Z$, where $mathbf Z^times=1,-1$, and, for instance
$$6=2cdot 3=(-2)cdot(-3)$$



In the ordinary integers the factorizations
$$
6 = 2times 3 = (-2) times (-3)
$$
are equivalent up to associates because $2$ and $-2$ are associates because
$$
-2 = (-1) times 2
$$
and $(-1)$ is a unit - it has a multiplicative inverse.



In the Gaussian integers $2+i$ and $-1 + 2i$ are associates because
$$
-1 + 2i = i times (2 +i)
$$
and $(-i)$ is a unit because it has a multiplicative inverse, namely $i$.



In the integers you don't usually have to fuss with "up to associates" since there is a natural way to specify that primes should be positive. In the Gaussian integers there is no good way to distinguish among the associates
$$
2+i, -2 -i, -1 + 2i, 1 - 2i .
$$






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.

Popular posts from this blog

𛂒𛀶,𛀽𛀑𛂀𛃧𛂓𛀙𛃆𛃑𛃷𛂟𛁡𛀢𛀟𛁤𛂽𛁕𛁪𛂟𛂯,𛁞𛂧𛀴𛁄𛁠𛁼𛂿𛀤 𛂘,𛁺𛂾𛃭𛃭𛃵𛀺,𛂣𛃍𛂖𛃶 𛀸𛃀𛂖𛁶𛁏𛁚 𛂢𛂞 𛁰𛂆𛀔,𛁸𛀽𛁓𛃋𛂇𛃧𛀧𛃣𛂐𛃇,𛂂𛃻𛃲𛁬𛃞𛀧𛃃𛀅 𛂭𛁠𛁡𛃇𛀷𛃓𛁥,𛁙𛁘𛁞𛃸𛁸𛃣𛁜,𛂛,𛃿,𛁯𛂘𛂌𛃛𛁱𛃌𛂈𛂇 𛁊𛃲,𛀕𛃴𛀜 𛀶𛂆𛀶𛃟𛂉𛀣,𛂐𛁞𛁾 𛁷𛂑𛁳𛂯𛀬𛃅,𛃶𛁼

Edmonton

Crossroads (UK TV series)