conjecture: if p is prime, the no. of rings of order p^2 is 11

Christian G. Bower bowerc at usa.net
Thu Apr 17 20:03:12 CEST 2008


suppose that for some element  a,  a^2  is not a multiple of  a.
   Now if  Q isn't 0,  we can divide by it, to get an equation
    4) the quadratic satisfied by  a  is irreducible.  In this
      case what we have is a quadratic extension of the field of
      order p,  which must be the (unique) field of order p^2.
    5) This quadratic is the product of two distinct linear factors.
       In this case, we can (by replacing  a  by a suitable  ra+s)
       make these be  x  and  x-1,  so that what we have is the
       field of order  p  extended by an idempotent  a^2 = a.
    6)  It's a square - but then we can make it  x^2,  and what
       we have is the field of order  p  extended by a quadratic
       unipotent  a  with  a^2 = 1.
   If  Q  IS  0, then either
    7)  P isn't 0 - in this case we can replace  a  by  b = a/P,
        which satisfies  b^3 = b,  and so the ring is that 
        generated by an "idemcubic" ...
    8) or it is,  and the ring is that generated by a cubic nilpotent.
   Eight rings so far - not too bad!
    In the remaining cases, every element satisfies an equation
    9) the zero (non-cyclic) ring, in which  a^2  is always  0.
send this letter off before considering these cases.
             John Conway 
   In all remaining cases, every element was either a quadratic
   Let's suppose there are two independent nilpotents  a  and  b.
     ab  =  Pa + Qb    ba  = Ra + Sb ,  say.
   Premultiplying the first of these by  a,  we see that Qab = 0,
so that either Q = 0  or  ab = 0,  in which case also Q = 0.  So
   So in any new case, all nilpotents are multiples of a given one,
            ab = Pa,     ba = Ra
            ab = Pab,  ba = Rba
showing that  P  and  R  must each be  0  or  1.  This seemingly
     0 0    0 a   0 0   0 a
     0 b    0 b   a b   a b.
   Obviously there must be either some isomorphisms or some nonrings
showing that either  Q=1  and  P=0  or  ab  is a multiple of a,
showing that either  P=1  and  Q=0  or  P=0.  So they're either
   ab =  0  or  a  or  b,  and similarly  ba =  0  or  a  or  b.
  Summary:  any ring not in my previous letter has either
  aa = 0,  bb = b,  ab = 0/a  ba = 0/a
  aa = a,  bb = b,  ab = 0/a/b,  ba = 0/a/b.
   Enough for now!   John Conway
   Let me attack those 9 last cases
    aa = a, bb = b,  ab = 0/a/b,  ba = 0/a/b
   ab = ba = 0;    ab = a,  ba = b;   ab = b,  ba = a;
                           4a  +  0  +  0  +  b
                           4a  + 2a  + 2b  +  b
                           
   10)  aa = ab = a,  bb = ba = b.
    Now let me look at the four cases
    aa = 0,  bb = b,  ab = 0/a,  ba = 0/a
showing that we have either
   11)  aa = ab = 0,  ba = a,  ab = b
   All that remains to be done is to check these rings 10) and
   For  10),  we find
    (Pa + Qb)(Ra + Sb) =  (Pa+Qb)(R+S)
showing that the product of any two elements is just a multiple
   For 11), we find
   (Pa + Qb)(Ra + Sb) =  Q(Ra+Sb)
    
    This makes it clear that the extra two rings are in fact
    NEW 10):  xy = h(x).y
    NEW 11):  xy = x.h(y)
   There remains one tiny point: the case
   aa = bb = a,   ab = ba = 0
   (Pa + Qb)(Ra + Sb) = PRa + QSb.
          0 0 0 0
          0 a 0 a
          0 0 b b
          0 a b c,  where  c = a+b.
  Oh!  I see that if we'd put  c  into our base, this would have
        My next (and maybe last?) letter will summarize the
             John Conway
 Additive group cyclic on  a:
     three cases   aa = a,  aa = pa,  aa = 0.
 
 Non-cyclic on  1,a  (1 a unit):
     three cases   aa = 0,  aa = a,  field of order  p^2.
 No unit, but generated by a single element:
     two cases     aaa = a,    aaa = 0.
 No unit, needs two generators:
     three cases     xy = 0,  xy = h(x).y,  xy = x.h(y)
   While preparing this list I noticed an error in its previous
   should be amended to read    "a^2 = 0"  in the last line.
   I quite enjoyed doing that!  Apologies to those who didn't want
            John Conway
Return-Path: <bowerc at usa.net>
X-Ids: 165
X-USANET-Source: 165.212.11.128  IN   bowerc at usa.net cmsapps05.cms.usa.net
X-USANET-MsgId: XID918mDqsgC0679X03
X-USANET-Auth: 165.212.8.8     AUTO bowerc at usa.net cmsweb08.cms.usa.net
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 11:06:22 -0700
From: "Christian G. Bower" <bowerc at usa.net>
To: "seqfan" <seqfan at ext.jussieu.fr>
Subject: Re: conjecture: if p is prime, the no. of rings of order p^2 is 11
X-Mailer: USANET web-mailer (CM.0402.7.87)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <828mDqsFw7224S08.1208455582 at cmsweb08.cms.usa.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Z-USANET-MsgId: XID981mDqsgX0180X28
X-Greylist: IP, sender and recipient auto-whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (shiva.jussieu.fr [134.157.0.165]); Thu, 17 Apr 2008 20:18:55 +0200 (CEST)
X-Miltered: at jchkmail.jussieu.fr with ID 4807948E.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)!
X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 4807948E.002/165.212.64.33/cmsout03.mbox.net/cmsout03.mbox.net/<bowerc at usa.net>
X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 4807948E.002 on jchkmail.jussieu.fr : j-chkmail score : XX : R=. U=. O=# B=0.264 -> S=0.306
X-j-chkmail-Status: Unsure
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by idf.ext.jussieu.fr id m3HIIt2M088836
From: "David Wilson" <davidwwilson at comcast.net>
To: "seqfan" <seqfan at ext.jussieu.fr>
Subject: Re: conjecture: if p is prime, the no. of rings of order p^2 is 11
showed a(8)=52, a(p^3)=3p+50 if p is odd prime. 
Return-Path: <maximilian.hasler at gmail.com>
X-Ids: 165
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth;
        bh=ENMrzC6a7BBePIzqfXBF/t9qQMK89+lUgGAwBcUXyJ4=;
        b=C7Vnykfszdsk4HcC1Aw5fFEjwmKqNbul/f6JfRF849IIzFFPe8MN0IV4QAeAk1n6HTiueMRNKUjBbKq0B27ttFYu23t2yqr+vfDhtEOoqFG1PrkKeKKMTzoMojcpFGHbAu2bPcxbct9aAFobJ4d0YylUvmZAHlxJOWnIRImVaho=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:reply-to:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth;
        b=nAB+GFyei3owZVEsUfWcXChZrviJPwHMjY4q9X789P7huHEtQYggySEb0d4TAB7xZvC3lpCLaf/IhdXZVQDfAwU/7wCdm8umQSUnGKofueKQu/C0f+ZUnGD79OVnke4G+PwOqI9/R7ffvlB42rE8E8S9yL/XZkhrd/R6xzV9rx0=
Message-ID: <3c3af2330804171130t2ee63898t677c2fb271505eaa at mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 14:30:56 -0400
From: "Maximilian Hasler" <Maximilian.Hasler at martinique.univ-ag.fr>
Reply-To: m at hasler.ws
Sender: maximilian.hasler at gmail.com
To: franktaw at netscape.net
Subject: Re: COMMENT FROM M. F. Hasler RE A037916
Cc: SeqFan <seqfan at ext.jussieu.fr>
In-Reply-To: <8CA6ECD787A0F18-8D4-D8C at mblk-d13.sysops.aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <3c3af2330804170618v4c9f5d65obdce2830040e8ffb at mail.gmail.com>
	 <8CA6ECD787A0F18-8D4-D8C at mblk-d13.sysops.aol.com>
X-Google-Sender-Auth: e894bcb4707c5c8f
X-Greylist: IP, sender and recipient auto-whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (shiva.jussieu.fr [134.157.0.165]); Thu, 17 Apr 2008 20:31:00 +0200 (CEST)
X-Miltered: at jchkmail.jussieu.fr with ID 48079762.007 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)!
X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 48079762.007/209.85.162.183/el-out-1112.google.com/el-out-1112.google.com/<maximilian.hasler at gmail.com>
X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 48079762.007 on jchkmail.jussieu.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.092 -> S=0.092
X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham

You are absolutely right, the word "sorted" is missing in my comment,
and the name of the second PARI procedure is misleading, it should be
replaced by

%o A037916 (PARI) primesig(n)=sum(i=1,#n=vecsort(factor(n)[,2]),10^(#n-i)*n[i])
 \\ up to the order of digits, the same result up to 2^10

But in any case simple concatenation becomes ambiguous from 2^11 on at
least, and multiplying with powers of 10 doesn't really give the pime
signature, either.
Maximilian


On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 2:10 PM,  <franktaw at netscape.net> wrote:
> It's a subtle distinction, but I have generally seen prime signature used to
> mean
>  the multiset of exponents in the prime factorization, rather than the
> sequence of
>  same.  This agrees with the Wikipedia definition -- note the words "sorted
> by size"
>  in that definition.
>
>  Franklin T. Adams-Watters
>
>
>
>  -----Original Message-----
>  From: Maximilian Hasler <Maximilian.Hasler at martinique.univ-ag.fr>
>
>  %I A037916
>  %S A037916
> 0,1,1,2,1,11,1,3,2,11,1,21,1,11,11,4,1,12,1,21,11,11,1,31,2,11,3,21,1
>  %C A037916 The sequence of (nonzero) exponents in the prime
>  factorization of a number is called its prime signature.
>  %H A037916 Wikipedia, <a
> href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_signature">
>   Prime signature</a>.
>  %o A037916 (PARI) A037916(n)=if( n>1,
> eval(concat(concat([""],factor(n)[,2]~))))
>  %o A037916 (PARI) primesig(n)=sum(i=1,#n=factor(n)[,2],10^(#n-i)*n[i])
>  \\ the same result up to 2^10
>  %K A037916 nonn,easy
>  %O A037916 1,4
>  %A A037916 M. F. Hasler (www.univ-ag.fr/~mhasler), Apr 17 2008
>





More information about the SeqFan mailing list