You are here
Homesecond proof of Wedderburn's theorem
Primary tabs
second proof of Wedderburn’s theorem
We can prove Wedderburn’s theorem,without using Zsigmondy’s theorem on the conjugacy class formula of the first proof;
let $G_{n}$ set of nth roots of unity and $P_{n}$ set of nth primitive
roots of unity and $\Phi_{d}(q)$ the dth cyclotomic polynomial.
It results

$\Phi_{n}(q)=\prod_{{\xi\in P_{n}}}(q\xi)$

$p(q)=q^{n}1=\prod_{{\xi\in G_{n}}}(q\xi)=\prod_{{d\mid n}}\Phi_{d}(q)$

$\Phi_{n}(q)\in\mathbb{Z}[q]\;$, it has multiplicative identity and $\Phi_{n}(q)\mid q^{n}1$

$\Phi_{n}(q)\mid\frac{q^{n}1}{q^{d}1}\;$with $d\mid n,d<n$
by conjugacy class formula, we have:
$q^{n}1=q1+\sum_{x}\frac{q^{n}1}{q^{{n_{x}}}1}$ 
by last two previous properties, it results:
$\Phi_{n}(q)\mid q^{n}1\;,\;\Phi_{n}(q)\mid\frac{q^{n}1}{q^{{n_{x}}}1}% \Rightarrow\Phi_{n}(q)\mid q1$ 
because $\Phi_{n}(q)$
divides the left and each addend of $\sum_{x}\frac{q^{n}1}{q^{{n_{x}}}1}$
of the right member of the conjugacy class formula.
By third property
$q>1\;,\;\Phi_{n}(x)\in\mathbb{Z}[x]\Rightarrow\Phi_{n}(q)\in\mathbb{Z}% \Rightarrow\Phi_{n}(q)\mid q1\Rightarrow\Phi_{n}(q)\leqslant q1$ 
If, for $n>1$,we have $\Phi_{n}(q)>q1$, then $n=1$ and the theorem is proved.
We know that
$\Phi_{n}(q)=\prod_{{\xi\in P_{n}}}q\xi\;,\;with\;q\xi\in\mathbb{C}$ 
by the triangle inequality in $\mathbb{C}$
$q\xi\geqslantq\xi=q1$ 
as $\xi$ is a primitive root of unity, besides
$q\xi=q1\Leftrightarrow\xi=1$ 
but
$n>1\Rightarrow\xi\neq 1$ 
therefore, we have
$q\xi>q1=q1\Rightarrow\Phi_{n}(q)>q1$ 
Mathematics Subject Classification
12E15 no label found Forums
 Planetary Bugs
 HS/Secondary
 University/Tertiary
 Graduate/Advanced
 Industry/Practice
 Research Topics
 LaTeX help
 Math Comptetitions
 Math History
 Math Humor
 PlanetMath Comments
 PlanetMath System Updates and News
 PlanetMath help
 PlanetMath.ORG
 Strategic Communications Development
 The Math Pub
 Testing messages (ignore)
 Other useful stuff
Recent Activity
new question: Lorenz system by David Bankom
Oct 19
new correction: examples and OEIS sequences by fizzie
Oct 13
new correction: Define Galois correspondence by porton
Oct 7
new correction: Closure properties on languages: DCFL not closed under reversal by babou
new correction: DCFLs are not closed under reversal by petey
Oct 2
new correction: Many corrections by Smarandache
Sep 28
new question: how to contest an entry? by zorba
new question: simple question by parag
Sep 26
new question: Latent variable by adam_reith