I'm just getting my head around the finite fields, so called Galois Fields. Why are they based on prime numbers only? any concept I'm missing?
2026-04-08 22:19:56.1775686796
On
On
Finite Fields. Why does it involve prime numbers only?
3.8k Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
3
There are 3 best solutions below
0
On
Assume $\operatorname{char} F=n=ab>0$ with $a,b>1$. Then $0=n=(1+\cdots+1)=(1+\cdots+1)(1+\cdots+1)=ab$.
Note that $a,b \in F\setminus\{0\}$. Does it happen $ab=0$ in field?
0
On
Let's try it with a composite number, $12$. We have $3\cdot 4 = 0$, so $$ 0 = 3^{-1}\cdot 0 = 3^{-1}\cdot(3\cdot4) = (3^{-1}\cdot3)\cdot 4 = 1\cdot4 = 4. $$
That's why it does not work with composite numbers.
Why it does work with prime numbers is a more substantial thing: How do you prove everything except $0$ has a multiplicative inverse in that case? That involves the quotients in Euclid's algorithm.
All fields must have characteristic $0$ (like $\mathbb{Q}$ or $\mathbb{R}$) or else characteristic $p$ a prime. If the characteristic were $n$, a composite, say $n=pn'$, then $0=pn'$. This shows $p$ is a zero-divisor and therefore not a unit.
If $p$ were a unit, you would have $0=p^{-1}\cdot0=p^{-1}pn'=n'$.