Not signed in (Sign In)

Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

  • Sign in using OpenID

Site Tag Cloud

2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry book bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration foundation foundations functional-analysis functor gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry graph graphs gravity grothendieck group group-theory harmonic-analysis higher higher-algebra higher-category-theory higher-differential-geometry higher-geometry higher-lie-theory higher-topos-theory homological homological-algebra homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory k-theory lie-theory limit limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology nlab noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pages pasting philosophy physics pro-object probability probability-theory quantization quantum quantum-field quantum-field-theory quantum-mechanics quantum-physics quantum-theory question representation representation-theory riemannian-geometry scheme schemes set set-theory sheaf simplicial space spin-geometry stable-homotopy-theory stack string string-theory subobject superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory tqft type type-theory universal variational-calculus

Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to nForum
If you want to take part in these discussions either sign in now (if you have an account), apply for one now (if you don't).
    • CommentRowNumber1.
    • CommentAuthorColin Tan
    • CommentTimeApr 17th 2014
    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeApr 18th 2014

    I expanded this a bit.

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthoradeelkh
    • CommentTimeApr 18th 2014

    “a bit” ;)

    I added a redirect from Frobenius automorphism to Frobenius morphism.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorColin Tan
    • CommentTimeApr 20th 2014

    I think the correct statement should be: For p a prime, If a finite field has p kp^k elements, then its group of units has p kp k1p^k - p^{k-1} elements.

    I guess essentially the difficulty of proving Fermat’s little theorem is the difficulty of proving that each of 1,2,,p11,2,\ldots, p-1 has an inverse modulo p.

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeApr 20th 2014
    • (edited Apr 20th 2014)

    No, Colin. A finite field with p kp^k elements does not refer to the integers modulo p kp^k (which isn’t a field at all). It refers to a degree kk algebraic extension of the field with pp elements. Up to (non-unique) isomorphism, there is a unique field with p kp^k elements; it is a splitting field for x p kx𝔽 p[x]x^{p^k} - x \in \mathbb{F}_p[x].

    There is no “difficulty” in proving Fermat’s little theorem.

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorColin Tan
    • CommentTimeApr 21st 2014
    Ah, every nonzero element of a field is invertible. I made a mistake.