Field (mathematical concept): Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
<blockquote> | <blockquote> | ||
The smallest field is $(\{0_F,1_F\},+_F,\cdot_F)$ | The smallest field is $(\{0_F,1_F\},+_F,\cdot_F)$. | ||
</blockquote> | </blockquote> | ||
| Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
* $\forall a \neq 0_F: \exists (a^{-1}) \in F, a\cdot_F (a^{-1})=1_F$ ('''multiplicative inverse''') | * $\forall a \neq 0_F: \exists (a^{-1}) \in F, a\cdot_F (a^{-1})=1_F$ ('''multiplicative inverse''') | ||
Also, note unlike for rings, there is no need to specify distributivity for each slot | Also, note unlike for rings, there is no need to specify distributivity for each slot. The slots for multiplication are symmetric in a field, because of multiplicative commutativity. | ||
</blockquote> | </blockquote> | ||
Latest revision as of 12:03, 17 October 2026
A field is a set closed under two binary operations, with some special properties by definition.
It is a subclass of rings.
Formal definition
Let $F:|F| \ge 2$ be a set, and $+_F,\cdot_F$ two binary operations defined over $F$.
If $\forall a,b,c \in F$:
- $a+_Fb=b+_Fa;a \cdot_F b = b \cdot_F a$ (commutativity)
- $(a+_Fb)+_Fc=a+_F(b+_Fc);(a \cdot_F b)\cdot_F c = a \cdot_F (b \cdot_F c)$ (associativity)
- $\exists 0_F,1_F \in F: a+_F0_F=a, a \cdot_F 1_F=a$ (identity)
- $\exists (-a) \in F: a +_F (-a)=0_F; \forall a \neq 0_F: \exists (a^{-1}) \in F, a\cdot_F (a^{-1})=1_F$ (inverse)
- $a\cdot_F (b+_Fc)=a\cdot_F b +_F a\cdot_F c$ (distributivity)
Then $(F,+_F,\cdot_F)$ is a field.
Just like in rings, $+_F,\cdot_F$ do not have to take the usual definitions of $+,\cdot $.
The smallest field is $(\{0_F,1_F\},+_F,\cdot_F)$.
Alternatively, a field can be defined as a ring with additional properties:
- $a \cdot_F b = b \cdot_F a$ (multiplicative commutativity)
- $\exists 1_F \in F: a \cdot_F 1_F=a$ (multiplicative identity)
- $\forall a \neq 0_F: \exists (a^{-1}) \in F, a\cdot_F (a^{-1})=1_F$ (multiplicative inverse)
Also, note unlike for rings, there is no need to specify distributivity for each slot. The slots for multiplication are symmetric in a field, because of multiplicative commutativity.
Examples
For each of the $F$ below, $(F,+_F,\cdot_F )$, where $+_F,\cdot_F=+,\cdot$ unless specified, is a field:
| $F$ | Note |
|---|---|
| $\mathbb{Q}$ | Rational number field, $1_F=1,0_F=0$ |
| $\mathbb{R}$ | Real number field, $1_F=1,0_F=0$ |
| $\{(a,b)|a,b \in \mathbb{F}\}$ | real 2D vector field, $1_F=(1,1),0_F=(0,0)$ |
Counterexamples:
| $F$ | Why $(F,+_F,\cdot_F )$ is not a field? |
|---|---|
| $\mathbb{N}$ | $a=1 \in \mathbb{N}: \nexists (-1) \in \mathbb{N}$ |
| $\mathbb{Z}$ | $a=2 \in \mathbb{N}: \nexists (2^{-1}) \in \mathbb{Z}$ |
- ↑ Michael Janssen and Melissa Lindsey. (2026). 2.1: Fields. LibreTexts. https://math.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Abstract_and_Geometric_Algebra/Rings_with_Inquiry_(Janssen_and_Lindsey)/02%3A_Fields_and_Rings/2.01%3A_Fields
- ↑ Michael Janssen and Melissa Lindsey. (2026). 2.2: Rings. LibreTexts. https://math.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Abstract_and_Geometric_Algebra/Rings_with_Inquiry_(Janssen_and_Lindsey)/02%3A_Fields_and_Rings/2.02%3A_Rings