Field With One Element - Field Extensions

Field Extensions

One may define field extensions of the field with one element as the group of roots of unity, or more finely (with a geometric structure) as the group scheme of roots of unity. This is non-naturally isomorphic to the cyclic group of order n, the isomorphism depending on choice of a primitive root of unity:

Thus a vector space of dimension d over F1n is a finite set of order dn on which the roots of unity act freely, together with a base point.

From this point of view the finite field Fq is an algebra over F1n, of dimension d = (q − 1)/n for any n that is a factor of q − 1 (for example n = q − 1 or n = 1). This corresponds to the fact that the group of units of a finite field Fq (which are the q − 1 non-zero elements) is a cyclic group of order q − 1, on which any cyclic group of order dividing q − 1 acts freely (by raising to a power), and the zero element of the field is the base point.

Similarly, the real numbers R are an algebra over F12, of infinite dimension, as the real numbers contain ±1, but no other roots of unity, and the complex numbers C are an algebra over F1n for all n, again of infinite dimension, as the complex numbers have all roots of unity.

From this point of view, any phenomenon that only depends on a field having roots of unity can be seen as coming from F1 – for example, the discrete Fourier transform (complex-valued) and the related number-theoretic transform (Z/nZ-valued).

Read more about this topic:  Field With One Element

Famous quotes containing the words field and/or extensions:

    In the field of world policy I would dedicate this Nation to the policy of the Good Neighbor—the neighbor who resolutely respects himself and, because he does, respects the rights of others—the neighbor who respects his obligations and respects the sanctity of his agreements in and with a world of neighbors.
    Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882–1945)

    The psychological umbilical cord is more difficult to cut than the real one. We experience our children as extensions of ourselves, and we feel as though their behavior is an expression of something within us...instead of an expression of something in them. We see in our children our own reflection, and when we don’t like what we see, we feel angry at the reflection.
    Elaine Heffner (20th century)