Since t2+5 is monic, we can use division algorithm to find the value of any element f∈Z[t]/(t2+5) modulo the relation. Hence, every such element can be written in the form a+bt for a,b∈Z.
Thus, for every element of Z[t]/(t2+5) we can find a corresponding element of Z[−5] by mapping a+bt to a+b−5. This gives us a bijective set function τ:Z[t]/(t2+5)→Z[−5].
We can verify directly that this function is a homomorphism:
By theorem 1.2 we know that Z being Noetherian implies that Z[t]/(t2+5) is Noetherian.
Suppose a,b∈R are such that ab=0. Transporting a,b over to the isomorphic ring Z[−5] we get a1+a2−5 and b1+b2−5 such that their product is zero. But Z[−5] is a subring of C and we know that C is a field, hence has no zero divisors.
■
Proposition A3
Let N:Z[−5]→Z be the map a+b−5↦a2+5b2. Then N is a homomorphism of multiplicative monoids.
Proof
Let s=−5.
Observe that N(a+bs)=(a+bs)(a−bs)=(a+bs)(a+bs), where x denotes the complex conjugate of x.
Let u,v∈Z[−5], then
N(uv)=uv(uv)=uvuv=uu⋅vv=N(u)N(v).
Since complex conjugate preserves 1, we have N(1)=1.
■
Proposition A4
Units of R=Z[−5] are ±1.
Proof
Monoid homomorphisms preserve units, so units of R have norm ±1. Since norm is positive, the units can only have norm 1.
Consider a2+5b2=1. If b=0, the left-hand side is at least 5 and equality cannot hold. So all units of R have zero imaginary component. The equation a2=1 has two solutions, namely a=1 and a=−1.
Thus, the two units of R are 1 and −1.
■
Proposition A5
Let R=Z[−5]. The elements 2,3,(1+−5),(1−−5)∈R are irreducible and pairwise nonassociate.
Proof
By direct computation we establish
N(2)=4
N(3)=9
N(1+−5)=6
N(1−−5)=6.
Observe that there exist no integer solutions for a2+5b2∈{2,3}. Since the norm is a homomorphism of multiplicative monoids, any failure of irreducibility among these elements would produce an element of R whose norm is 2 or 3. No such elements exist. Thus we have established irreducibility.
By lemma 1.5 we know that associate elements p,q of an integral domain (see A2) satisfy p=uq for a unit u. The only units of R are −1 and 1 (see A4).
By direct computation we can verify that multiplying any of the elements under consideration by either of the two units never produces another, distinct element on our list.
Hence, these elements are pairwise nonassociate.
■
Proposition A6
Let R=Z[−5]. The elements 2,3,(1+−5),(1−−5)∈R are not prime.
Proof
Observe that (1+−5)(1−−5)=6 and 6∈(2),6∈(3). Elements of (2) have norm divisible by 4, which (1±−5) doesn’t have. Elements of (3) have norm divisible by 9, which (1±−5) doesn’t have. So (2) and (3) are not prime ideals.
Observe that 6∈(1+−5). Elements of (1+−5) have the norm divisible by 6, which neither 2 nor 3 have. So (1+−5) is not prime.
Observe that 6∈(1−−5). Elements of (1−−5) have the norm divisible by 6, which neither 2 nor 3 have. So (1−−5) is not prime.
■
Proposition A7
Let R=Z[−5]. Then R is not a UFD.
Proof
By A4 we know that 2,3,(1+−5),(1−−5)∈R are non-units. By A5 we know that these elements are irreducible and pairwise nonassociate. We also know that 6∈R is a non-unit.
There are multiple ways to factor 6 into irreducibles: