Alphabeta Math
Pipeline-generated
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

✓ 7 results · all verified · 7 also independently AI-judged
Every result on this page is machine-checked by a proof checker and read in full and owner-audited; the judge is an additional, independent cross-model AI review of the proofs; all 7 also cleared it.

Minkowski Theory and Number Field Class Groups — Examples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

The examples run the Minkowski bound as a computational tool. The Gaussian integers have trivial class group because MK=4/π<2; the fields Q(−5) and Q(10) have class group Z/2Z, exhibited through a ramified prime ideal of norm 2, or through the norm-2 and norm-3 ideals tied together by an element of norm 6; and the quintic field of X5−X−1 has trivial class group because no ideal of norm 2 or 3 exists.

The two final examples isolate the numerical and ramification content of the degree bound: the signature factor (4/π)r2n!/nn is always less than 1, forcing ∣dK∣>1, and a field of degree greater than one cannot be unramified at every finite rational prime. The counterexample shows how mixing the scaled and unscaled embedding conventions changes the covolume and produces a false prediction from the equality criterion.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

None yet.

5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: Literature-sourcedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-6.1-sol)audited 2026-10-02Open item page →

Minkowski bound for Gaussian integers

Example

Assume the Axiom of Choice. For K=Q(i) the Minkowski constant is MK=4/π<2, so every class in Cl⁡(Z[i]) has an integral representative of norm at most MK, hence of norm 1 and equal to Z[i] itself; the class group of the Gaussian integers is trivial and Z[i] is a principal ideal domain.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The Axiom of Choice and the imaginary quadratic field K=Q(i) with OK=Z[i] and discriminant dK=−4.

[F1]

For the squarefree integer d=−1, which is 3(mod4), the quadratic-field formulas give OK=Z[i] and dK=4⋅(−1)=−4 (Integers in a quadratic field, Discriminant of a quadratic field).

[F2]

Signature: r1 is the number of field embeddings K→R fixing Q and r2 is the number of complex-conjugate pairs among the nonreal field embeddings K→C fixing Q, with r1+2r2=[K:Q] (Archimedean embeddings and signature).

[F3]

Minkowski bound: every class of Cl⁡(OK) contains an integral ideal b with Nb≤MK (Minkowski bound for ideal classes, The ideal class group).

[F4]

For a nonzero integral ideal a the norm Na=∣OK/a∣ is a finite positive integer, so Na≥1, and Na=1 forces a=OK (The absolute norm of an integral ideal, A nonzero number-field ideal has finite quotient).

[F5]

Gregory-Leibniz: π/4=1−1/3+R1 with R1=∫01x4/(1+x2) dx>0, hence π>8/3>2 (The Gregory-Leibniz series: pi over four equals 1-1/3+1/5-1/7+...).

[F6]

Under the Axiom of Choice, the ring of integers of a number field is a Dedekind domain (Rings of integers are Dedekind domains).

[F7]

Dedekind PID criterion: a Dedekind domain R is a principal ideal domain if and only if its ideal class group is trivial (A Dedekind domain is a PID exactly when its class group is trivial).

Proof

1.1F1F2algebra

By [F1], OK=Z[i] and dK=−4. Every field embedding K→C fixing Q sends i to a root of X2+1, that is, to ±i, and both of these are nonreal; so (r1,r2)=(0,1) with n=2 by [F2].

2.1F5step 1.1algebra

Minkowski constant: by step 1.1 and [F1], MK=(4/π)12!224=4π⋅12⋅2=4π; by [F5] π>8/3>2, so MK=4/π<2.

3.1F3F4step 2.1

Every class of Cl⁡(OK) contains an integral ideal b with Nb≤MK<2 by [F3] and step 2.1. By [F4] the norm Nb is a positive integer, so Nb=1 and therefore b=OK, which is principal; hence every class is the principal class and Cl⁡(Z[i]) is trivial.

4.1F6F7step 3.1

By [F6] the Gaussian integers Z[i]=OK form a Dedekind domain, so the criterion [F7] applies and the triviality of the class group from step 3.1 makes Z[i] a principal ideal domain.

5.1step 1.1step 2.1step 3.1step 4.1∎

In summary, K=Q(i) has MK=4/π<2, Cl⁡(Z[i]) is trivial, and Z[i] is a principal ideal domain.

Remarks

This is the smallest case of the Minkowski bound: the signature (0,1) contributes the factor 4/π rather than none, but the unique class bound 4/π<2 still falls below the smallest norm of a nonzero nonunit ideal, so the bound certifies that the class group is trivial without any further computation. The passage from a trivial class group to the principal ideal domain property uses that Z[i] is Dedekind, since a general domain with trivial class group need not be a PID.

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: Literature-sourcedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-6.1-sol)audited 2026-10-02Open item page →

Class group of Q(sqrt -5)

Example

Assume the Axiom of Choice. For K=Q(−5) the ideal class group is Cl⁡(OK)≅Z/2Z, generated by the class of the prime ideal p=(2,1+−5). The concrete content is: OK=Z[−5], dK=−20, the Minkowski constant satisfies MK=2π20<3, the ideal p is the unique integral ideal of norm 2, it satisfies p2=(2), and it is not principal because a2+5b2=2 has no integer solution.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The Axiom of Choice, K=Q(−5) with OK=Z[−5] and discriminant dK=−20, and the ideal p=(2,1+−5)⊆OK.

[F1]

For the squarefree integer d=−5≡3(mod4), the quadratic-field formulas give OK=Z[−5] and dK=4d=−20 (Integers in a quadratic field, Discriminant of a quadratic field).

[F2]

π>3, from the Gregory-Leibniz partial sum through N=7 (The Gregory-Leibniz series: pi over four equals 1-1/3+1/5-1/7+...).

[F3]

Minkowski bound: every class of Cl⁡(OK) contains an integral ideal b with Nb≤MK (Minkowski bound for ideal classes, The ideal class group).

[F4]

For a nonzero integral ideal, Na=∣OK/a∣; for nonzero integral ideals N(ab)=Na Nb; and for 0≠β∈OK, N((β))=∣NK/Q(β)∣ (The absolute norm of an integral ideal, Ideal norm is multiplicative, The norm of a principal integral ideal).

[F5]

Field norm as a determinant: for β∈K the norm NK/Q(β) is the determinant of multiplication by β on the two-dimensional Q-vector space K (The norm NK/F and trace Tr⁡K/F of a finite field extension). In the basis 1,−5 the matrix of multiplication by a+b−5 is (a−5bba), so NK/Q(a+b−5)=a2+5b2.

[F6]

If a⊆b are nonzero integral ideals with Na=Nb finite, then a=b: by the third isomorphism theorem for the additive groups, the group b/a has order Na/Nb=1, hence is trivial.

[F7]

The rule φ(a+b−5)=a+b mod 2 is a surjective ring homomorphism OK→F2, because φ(−5)=1 satisfies 12=−5 mod 2; its kernel is (2,1+−5)=p, so OK/p≅F2 and Np=2 (The ideal generated by a subset and principal ideals).

Proof

1.1F1given

By [F1], OK=Z[−5], dK=−20, and the signature is (r1,r2)=(0,1) with n=2.

1.2F4F7algebra

The rule φ(a+b−5)=a+b(mod2) is additive and multiplicative (the only nontrivial check is (a+b−5)(a′+b′−5)=(aa′−5bb′)+(ab′+a′b)−5 mapping to aa′−5bb′+ab′+a′b≡aa′+bb′+ab′+a′b=(a+b)(a′+b′) in F2), is surjective, and its kernel consists of the a+b−5 with a+b even, which are exactly the elements of the ideal (2,1+−5): the kernel contains 2 and 1+−5, and conversely a+b−5=b(1+−5)+(a−b) with a−b even when a+b is even. Hence OK/p≅F2 and Np=2.

2.1F2step 1.1algebra

Minkowski constant: MK=(4/π)r2(n!/nn)∣dK∣=(4/π)⋅(1/2)⋅20=2π20<23⋅92=3, since π>3 by [F2] and 20<9/2.

2.2F4F6step 1.2algebra

p2=(2): the products of the generators 2 and 1+−5 are 4, 2(1+−5)=2+2−5 and (1+−5)2=−4+2−5, all multiples of 2, so p2⊆(2); by [F4] the norms are N(p2)=(Np)2=4 and N((2))=∣NK/Q(2)∣=4, so [F6] gives p2=(2).

2.3F4F6F7step 1.2algebra

Uniqueness of the norm-2 ideal: let b be an integral ideal with Nb=2. Then OK/b has two elements, so 2∈b; the composite Z[X]→OK→OK/b sends X2+5 to 0 and X to an element u of the two-element ring F2 with u2=−5≡1(modb), so u=1 (as 02≠1); hence X−1 and 2 lie in the kernel, the image of (2,X−1) is (2,−5−1)=(2,1+−5)=p, and p⊆b; with Np=Nb=2, [F6] yields b=p.

2.4F4F5step 1.2algebra

p is not principal: if p=(β), then β∈p⊆OK and by [F4] and [F5] the equation a2+5b2=2 would hold for β=a+b−5. But b=0 gives a2=2, impossible, and b≠0 gives a2+5b2≥5>2; so no such β exists.

3.1step 2.2step 2.4algebra

In the class group, [p]2=[p2]=[(2)]=1 is the identity class, while [p]≠1 by step 2.4; hence [p] has order exactly 2.

3.2F3step 2.1step 2.3

Every class has an integral representative b with Nb≤MK<3 by [F3] and step 2.1, so its norm is 1 or 2: norm 1 forces b=OK, and norm 2 forces b=p by step 2.3.

4.1step 3.1step 3.2∎

Hence every class is either the principal class or [p], so Cl⁡(OK)={1,[p]}≅Z/2Z is generated by the class of p=(2,1+−5).

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: Literature-sourcedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-6.1-sol)audited 2026-10-02Open item page →

Class group of Q(sqrt 10)

Example

Assume the Axiom of Choice. For K=Q(10) the ideal class group is Cl⁡(OK)≅Z/2Z, generated by the class of the prime ideal p2=(2,10). The concrete content is: OK=Z[10], dK=40, the signature is (2,0) so that the Minkowski constant is MK=10<4, the ideals of norm 2 and 3 are exactly p2=(2,10), p3=(3,1+10) and p3′=(3,1−10), the products p22=(2), p3p3′=(3) and p2p3=(4+10) are principal, and p2 is not principal because a2−10b2=±2 has no integer solution.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The Axiom of Choice, K=Q(10) with OK=Z[10] and discriminant dK=40, and the element δ=10.

[F1]

For the squarefree integer d=10, which is not 1(mod4), the quadratic-field formulas give OK=Z[10] and dK=4⋅10=40 (Integers in a quadratic field, Discriminant of a quadratic field).

[F2]

Signature: r1 is the number of field embeddings K→R fixing Q and r2 is the number of complex-conjugate pairs among the nonreal field embeddings K→C fixing Q, with r1+2r2=[K:Q] (Archimedean embeddings and signature).

[F3]

Minkowski bound: every class of Cl⁡(OK) contains an integral ideal b with Nb≤MK (Minkowski bound for ideal classes, The ideal class group).

[F4]

For a nonzero integral ideal a, the absolute norm Na=∣OK/a∣ is a finite positive integer; for nonzero integral ideals N(ab)=Na Nb; and for 0≠β∈OK, N((β))=∣NK/Q(β)∣ (The absolute norm of an integral ideal, A nonzero number-field ideal has finite quotient, Ideal norm is multiplicative, The norm of a principal integral ideal).

[F5]

Field norm as a determinant: for β∈K the norm NK/Q(β) is the determinant of multiplication by β on the two-dimensional Q-vector space K (The norm NK/F and trace Tr⁡K/F of a finite field extension). In the basis 1,10 the matrix of multiplication by a+b10 is (a10bba), so NK/Q(a+b10)=a2−10b2.

[F6]

If a⊆b are nonzero integral ideals with Na=Nb, then a=b: the canonical surjection OK/a→OK/b identifies the finite group OK/b with a quotient of the finite group OK/a of the same order, and Lagrange's theorem leaves only the trivial quotient (Lagrange's theorem: ∣G∣=[G:H]∣H∣ for every subgroup H of a finite group G).

[F7]

Product of ideals: for two-sided ideals I,J, IJ={∑k=1mikjk:m≥0, ik∈I, jk∈J}, and for a subset S⊆R the ideal (S) is the intersection of all ideals containing S (The sum I+J and product IJ of two-sided ideals, The ideal generated by a subset and principal ideals).

Proof

1.1F1F2algebra

By [F1], OK=Z[δ] with dK=40. Every field embedding K→C fixing Q sends δ to a root of X2−10, that is, to ±δ, and both of these are real; so (r1,r2)=(2,0) with n=2 by [F2].

1.2F4F7construct

The map φ(a+bδ)=a mod 2 is a surjective ring homomorphism OK→F2: it is additive, and (a+bδ)(a′+b′δ)=(aa′+10bb′)+(ab′+a′b)δ maps to aa′+10bb′≡aa′=φ(a+bδ)φ(a′+b′δ)(mod2). Its kernel is {a+bδ:a≡0(mod2)}, which equals the ideal p2:=(2,δ): the products 2x+δy have even coefficient of 1, and conversely a+bδ=2⋅a2+bδ. Hence OK/p2≅F2 and Np2=2 by [F4].

1.3F4F7construct

Similarly ψ(a+bδ)=a−b mod 3 is a surjective ring homomorphism OK→F3: since 10≡1(mod3), it sends (a+bδ)(a′+b′δ) to aa′+bb′−ab′−a′b=(a−b)(a′−b′) modulo 3. Its kernel is {a+bδ:a≡b(mod3)}, which equals p3:=(3,1+δ) because a+bδ=3x+b(1+δ) when a=b+3x and conversely 3x+y(1+δ)=(3x+y)+yδ has congruent coefficients. So Np3=3. Likewise ψ′(a+bδ)=a+b mod 3 is a surjective ring homomorphism with kernel {a+bδ:a≡−b(mod3)}=p3′:=(3,1−δ), so Np3′=3.

1.4F7algebra

p22=(2): by [F7] the square is generated by the products of the generators 2,δ, namely 4, 2δ and δ2=10, so p22=(4,2δ,10). All three generators are multiples of 2, giving p22⊆(2); conversely 2=10−2⋅4∈p22, so (2)⊆p22. Hence p22=(2).

1.5F7algebra

p3p3′=(3): by [F7] the product is generated by 9, 3(1−δ), 3(1+δ) and (1+δ)(1−δ)=1−10=−9, so p3p3′=3⋅(3,1−δ,1+δ). That second ideal contains (1−δ)+(1+δ)=2 and 3, hence contains 3−2=1, so it is OK and p3p3′=(3).

2.1F1step 1.1algebra

Minkowski constant: by step 1.1 and [F1], MK=(4/π)02!2240=12⋅210=10<4, because 10<16.

2.2F4F6F7step 1.2step 1.3

Uniqueness: let b be an integral ideal with Nb=p∈{2,3}. Then OK/b has p elements, so its additive group is generated by 1 and it is isomorphic to Fp; the composite Z[X]→OK→Fp sends X to an element u with u2=10. For p=2 one has u2=0, so u=0, hence 2 and X lie in the kernel and the image of (2,X) is (2,δ)=p2⊆b; with Np2=2=Nb, step 1.2 and [F6] give b=p2. For p=3 one has u2=1, so u=±1: if u=1 then (3,δ−1)=(3,1−δ)=p3′⊆b and if u=−1 then (3,δ+1)=p3⊆b, so by step 1.3 and [F6] b is p3′ or p3.

2.3F7step 1.2

By [F7] the product p2p3 is generated by the products 6, 2(1+δ), 3δ and δ(1+δ)=10+δ; the identity 4+δ=(10+δ)−6 exhibits 4+δ in the product, so (4+δ)⊆p2p3.

2.4F4F5step 1.2algebra

p2 is not principal: if p2=(β) with β=a+bδ, then by [F4] and [F5], 2=Np2=N((β))=∣NK/Q(β)∣=∣a2−10b2∣, so a2−10b2=±2. Reducing modulo 5 gives a2≡±2(mod5), but the squares modulo 5 are 0,1,4 and neither 2 nor 3 occurs; this contradiction shows no such β exists.

3.1F4F5F6step 2.3step 1.2step 1.3algebra

Inclusion and equal norms force equality: by [F5] and [F4], N((4+δ))=∣16−10∣=6, while N(p2p3)=2⋅3=6 by steps 1.2 and 1.3; with (4+δ)⊆p2p3 from step 2.3, [F6] gives p2p3=(4+δ).

4.1F3step 1.4step 1.5step 3.1

Principal products are the identity class: step 1.4 gives [p2]2=[p22]=[(2)]=1, and step 3.1 gives [p2][p3]=[(4+δ)]=1, so [p3]=[p2]−1=[p2]; step 1.5 gives [p3][p3′]=[(3)]=1, so [p3′]=[p3]−1=[p2].

5.1step 4.1step 2.4

Hence [p2]2=1 by step 4.1 while [p2]≠1 by step 2.4, so [p2] has order exactly 2.

5.2F3F4step 2.1step 2.2step 4.1

By [F3] and step 2.1 every class of Cl⁡(OK) contains an integral ideal b with Nb≤10<4, and Nb is a positive integer by [F4], so Nb∈{1,2,3}. If Nb=1 then OK/b is trivial, that is b=OK; if Nb=2 then b=p2; and if Nb=3 then b is p3 or p3′, by step 2.2. By step 4.1 all of these ideals represent either the identity class or [p2].

6.1step 5.1step 5.2∎

Therefore every class of Cl⁡(OK) is 1 or [p2], so Cl⁡(OK)={1,[p2]}≅Z/2Z is generated by the class of p2=(2,10).

Remarks

The example is the real-quadratic counterpart of the computation for Q(−5): the ramified prime 2 gives p22=(2) with p2 nonprincipal, the split prime 3 gives two conjugate prime ideals whose product is (3), and the element 4+10 of norm 6 links the two, forcing [p3]=[p2]. Since r2=0 the Minkowski constant carries no factor 4/π and equals 10; the bound 10<4 leaves only the norms 1,2,3, and each of these norms has exactly the ideals listed.

ExampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-6.1-sol)audited 2026-10-02Open item page →

Higher-degree class group by norm exclusions

Example

Assume the Axiom of Choice. Let α be a root of f=X5−X−1 and K=Q(α). Then OK=Z[α], dK=2869=19⋅151, the Minkowski constant satisfies MK<4, and Cl⁡(OK) is trivial, because no nonzero integral ideal of OK has norm 2 or 3 and every class has a representative of norm <4.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The Axiom of Choice, the polynomial f=X5−X−1∈Z[X], and a root α of f with K=Q(α).

[F1]

Reduction modulo a prime: if f∈Z[x] is primitive of positive degree, p does not divide its leading coefficient, and the reduction fˉ∈Fp[x] is irreducible, then f is irreducible in Q[x] (Irreducibility after reduction modulo a prime implies irreducibility over Q when the leading coefficient survives).

[F2]

Discriminant and resultant: for monic f of degree n, Res⁡(f,f′)=(−1)n(n−1)/2Disc⁡(f) (For monic f of degree n, Res⁡(f,f′)=(−1)n(n−1)/2Disc⁡(f)), and in an algebra in which f splits with roots r1,…,rn one has Res⁡(f,f′)=∏if′(ri) and Disc⁡(f)=∏i<j(ri−rj)2 (The monic resultant Res⁡(f,g) from the symmetric coefficient expression of ∏ig(xi), The discriminant of a monic polynomial as the coefficient expression of Δn2).

[F3]

Vieta: if f=tn+a1tn−1+⋯+an splits in a commutative algebra as f(t)=∏i=1n(t−αi), then ak=(−1)kek(α1,…,αn) (Vieta's formulas identify the coefficients of a split monic polynomial with elementary symmetric functions of its roots).

[F4]

Power-basis discriminant: if f is the degree-n monic minimal polynomial of α, then disc⁡(1,α,…,αn−1)=Disc⁡(f) (Power-basis and polynomial discriminants).

[F5]

If integral α generates K and its power-basis discriminant is squarefree, then OK=Z[α] (Squarefree power discriminant criterion).

[F6]

α∈OK exactly when its monic minimal polynomial over Q lies in Z[X] (Minimal-polynomial criterion for algebraic integers).

[F7]

For a nonzero integral ideal a of norm Na=p with p a rational prime: Na=∣OK/a∣, and for a nonzero prime P one has NP=pf≥2 (The absolute norm of an integral ideal, The norm of a prime ideal).

[F8]

Minkowski bound: every class of Cl⁡(OK) contains an integral ideal b with Nb≤MK (Minkowski bound for ideal classes, The ideal class group).

[F9]

Gregory-Leibniz: the partial sum of ∑k(−1)k/(2k+1) through N=7 is 33976/45045>3/4 with positive remainder, giving π>3 (The Gregory-Leibniz series: pi over four equals 1-1/3+1/5-1/7+...).

Proof

1.1algebra

Reduction modulo 3: fˉ=X5+2X+2 has values 2,2,2 at 0,1,2, so it has no linear factor; division by the three monic irreducible quadratics leaves remainders 2 for X2+1 (where X2≡−1), X+2 for X2+X+2 (where X2≡−X−2), and X+2 for X2+2X+2 (where X2≡−2X−2); hence fˉ has no factor of degree at most 2, and a degree-5 reducible polynomial would have one, so fˉ is irreducible over F3.

1.2F2F3algebra

Discriminant: in C write f=∏i=15(t−ri); by [F2] and [F3], Disc⁡(f)=Res⁡(f,f′)=∏i(5ri4−1) and ∏iri=−a5=1. Since f(ri)=0 and ri≠0 (as f(0)=−1), we have ri4=(ri+1)/ri and 5ri4−1=(4ri+5)/ri; moreover ∏i(4ri+5)=45∏i(ri+5/4)=−45f(−5/4)=−1024(−31251024+54−1)=2869. Hence Disc⁡(f)=2869.

2.1F1F6step 1.1

By [F1] with p=3 the polynomial f is irreducible over Q, so it is the minimal polynomial of α, K=Q(α) has degree 5, and α∈OK by [F6].

2.2F7step 1.1algebra

No ideal of norm 2 or 3: if Na=p∈{2,3}, then OK/a is a commutative ring with p elements, hence isomorphic to Fp; the composite Z[X]→OK→Fp with X↦αˉ kills f, so f has a root mod p by [F7]; but f mod 3 has values 2,2,2 and f mod 2 has values 1,1 at all elements of their prime fields, a contradiction.

3.1F4F5step 2.1step 1.2algebra

The factorisation 2869=19⋅151 consists of distinct primes, so Disc⁡(f) is squarefree; by [F2] and [F4] the power-basis discriminant of α is 2869, so [F5] gives OK=Z[α] and dK=2869.

3.2step 2.1algebra

Signature: f′=5X4−1 vanishes exactly at ±c with c=5−1/4; since c4=1/5, f(−c)=−c5+c−1=45c−1<0 and f(c)=c5−c−1=−45c−1<0, using 0<c<1. The derivative is positive on (−∞,−c), negative on (−c,c), and positive on (c,∞), so the local maximum and local minimum are both negative. Since f(x)→−∞ as x→−∞ and f(x)→+∞ as x→+∞, there is exactly one real root and two conjugate pairs of nonreal roots, that is (r1,r2)=(1,2).

4.1F9step 3.1step 3.2algebra

Minkowski constant: MK=(4/π)25!552869=1203125(4π)22869<1203125⋅169⋅54=115203125<4, using π>3 of [F9] and 2869<54.

5.1F8step 3.1step 4.1step 2.2

Every class of Cl⁡(OK) has an integral representative b with Nb≤MK<4 by [F8] and step 4.1; the norm is a positive integer, so Nb∈{1,2,3}, and step 2.2 rules out 2 and 3, leaving Nb=1, i.e. b=OK; hence every class is principal and Cl⁡(OK) is trivial.

6.1step 3.1step 4.1step 5.1∎

Therefore OK=Z[α], dK=2869=19⋅151, MK<4, and Cl⁡(OK) is trivial.

Remarks

The example illustrates the standard norm-exclusion computation in degree 5: irreducibility modulo the small prime 3 produces the field, the resultant computation of the discriminant certifies the ring of integers because 2869=19⋅151 is squarefree, and the small primes 2 and 3 are eliminated by checking that f has no root modulo them. A root modulo p is exactly what a nonzero ideal of norm p would produce.

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: Literature-sourcedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-6.1-sol)audited 2026-10-02Open item page →

Signature constant rules out discriminant ±1

Example

Assume the Axiom of Choice. Write the Minkowski numerical constant of a signature (r1,r2) with n=r1+2r2>1 as Cn,r2=(4/π)r2n!/nn. Then Cn,r2<1, and consequently the inequality 1≤Cn,r2∣dK∣ that the class bound produces for a field of that signature forces ∣dK∣>1. The two cases of degree 2 are C2,0=1/2 and C2,1=2/π, and for n≥3 the bound r2≤n/2 reduces the constant to the auxiliary sequence Un=(4/π)n/2n!/nn<1.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The Axiom of Choice and a signature (r1,r2) with n=r1+2r2>1, together with a number field K of that signature.

[F1]

Minkowski bound: every class of Cl⁡(OK) contains an integral ideal b with Nb≤MK=(4/π)r2n!nn∣dK∣ (Minkowski bound for ideal classes, The ideal class group).

[F2]

For a nonzero integral ideal b the norm Nb=∣OK/b∣ is a finite positive integer, hence Nb≥1 (The absolute norm of an integral ideal, A nonzero number-field ideal has finite quotient).

[F3]

Gregory-Leibniz with N=1 and N=2: π/4=1−1/3+R1 with R1=∫01x4/(1+x2) dx>0 and π/4=1−1/3+1/5+R2 with R2=−∫01x6/(1+x2) dx<0, so 8/3<π<52/15<4; in particular 2/π<1 and 4/π>1 (The Gregory-Leibniz series: pi over four equals 1-1/3+1/5-1/7+...).

[F4]

Bernoulli's inequality: (1+x)m≥1+mx for x≥−1 and natural m (Bernoulli's inequality (1+x)n≥1+nx).

[F5]

The preceding corollary: for n>1, ∣dK∣>1 (Nontrivial number fields have discriminant of absolute value greater than one).

Proof

1.1F3algebra

Degree two: C2,0=(4/π)0⋅2!/22=1/2<1, while C2,1=(4/π)⋅2!/22=2/π<1 by [F3].

1.2F3F4algebra

Auxiliary sequence: put Um:=(4/π)m/2m!/mm for m≥2. Then U2=2/π<1 by [F3]; for m≥2 Bernoulli's inequality [F4] with x=1/m gives (1+1/m)m≥2, so Um+1/Um=2π(mm+1)m≤1π<1 by [F3], and therefore Um≤U2(π)−(m−2)<1 for every m≥2.

2.1F3step 1.2givenalgebra

General signature: 4/π>1 by [F3], so Cn,r2=(4/π)r2n!/nn≤(4/π)n/2n!/nn=Un<1 by step 1.2 and the hypothesis r2≤n/2; thus Cn,r2<1 for every n>1.

3.1F1F2step 1.1step 2.1algebra

Class bound and conclusion: by [F1] the principal class contains an integral ideal b with Nb≤Cn,r2∣dK∣; by [F2] Nb is a positive integer, so 1≤Nb≤Cn,r2∣dK∣. Since 0<Cn,r2<1 by steps 1.1 and 2.1, dividing gives ∣dK∣≥1/Cn,r2>1, hence ∣dK∣>1.

4.1F5step 1.1step 2.1step 3.1∎

Summary: for every signature with n>1 the numerical constant Cn,r2 is less than 1, so the Minkowski inequality 1≤Cn,r2∣dK∣ forces ∣dK∣>1; the degree-two constants are C2,0=1/2 and C2,1=2/π. This records exactly where the signature factor (4/π)r2 enters and recovers the conclusion of [F5] from the class bound alone.

Remarks

The example isolates the arithmetic of the constant: the factor 4/π is larger than 1, so the worst case for a given degree is the maximal number r2≤n/2 of conjugate pairs, and at n=2 the two constants 1/2 and 2/π are already smaller than the smallest possible ideal norm. Only the elementary bounds 2<π<4 and Bernoulli's inequality are used; the value of the constant is never needed beyond strict comparison with 1. Signatures with n>1 that are not realized by any number field cause no difficulty, since the statement is conditional on a field of the given signature existing.

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: Literature-sourcedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-6.1-sol)audited 2026-10-02Open item page →

No nontrivial everywhere unramified number field over Q

Example

Assume the Axiom of Choice. A finite number field K≠Q cannot be unramified at every finite rational prime. Indeed, if K were unramified at every rational prime, the ramification-discriminant criterion would leave dK a nonzero integer with no prime divisor, so ∣dK∣=1; but every field of degree n>1 has ∣dK∣>1. The statement concerns finite primes only, and no archimedean convention is used.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The Axiom of Choice, a number field K with K≠Q, so that n=[K:Q]>1, and the discriminant dK.

[F1]

A rational prime p ramifies in K/Q if and only if p∣dK (Ramification is detected by the number-field discriminant).

[F2]

Every finite number field K with [K:Q]>1 has a rational prime that ramifies in K (Every nontrivial number field has a ramified finite prime).

[F4]

dK is a nonzero signed integer (Number-field discriminant is well-defined and nonzero).

[F6]

A prime is unramified in an extension when all its ramification indices are 1, and ramified otherwise; for K/Q the relevant primes of Z are the rational primes (Splitting and ramification terminology).

Proof

1.1F4given

By [F4] the discriminant dK is a nonzero integer.

2.1F1F6step 1.1

If K is unramified at every rational prime, then no rational prime divides dK: for if p∣dK, then [F1] makes p ramified in K, and [F6] exhibits a ramification index exceeding 1 at p, contrary to the hypothesis.

2.2F4F5step 1.1

Conversely, if no rational prime divides dK, then ∣dK∣=1: otherwise ∣dK∣>1 and [F5] would produce a rational prime dividing ∣dK∣, hence dividing dK, and dK≠0 by step 1.1 leaves ∣dK∣=1.

3.1F1step 2.1step 2.2

Equivalence: K is unramified at every rational prime if and only if ∣dK∣=1. Indeed, unramified everywhere gives no prime divisor of dK by step 2.1 and then ∣dK∣=1 by step 2.2; conversely, if ∣dK∣=1 then no rational prime divides dK, so no rational prime ramifies by [F1].

4.1F2F3step 3.1

But n>1, so [F3] gives ∣dK∣>1, contradicting the equivalence in step 3.1; equivalently, [F2] directly produces a ramified rational prime.

5.1F1F2step 3.1step 4.1∎

Therefore no finite number field K≠Q is unramified at every finite rational prime. The argument uses only finite primes: dK is the determinant of the trace pairing of an integral basis, the criterion [F1] concerns rational primes, and no archimedean place enters; correspondingly dQ=1 and Q itself has no ramified primes.

Remarks

The example is the contrapositive form of the ramification criterion: an integer discriminant with no prime divisor must be ±1, and ±1 is impossible for a field of degree greater than one. The hypothesis K≠Q is essential, since dQ=1 and Q has no ramified finite prime. The phrase "every finite rational prime" is deliberate: the criterion and the discriminant are statements about finite primes, and no claim about archimedean places is made or needed.

CounterexampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-6.1-sol)audited 2026-10-02Open item page →

Mixing scaled and unscaled Minkowski covolumes fails

Statement refuted

For K=Q(i) the unscaled Minkowski image of OK is Z2, of covolume 1, and the 2-scaled image, obtained by multiplying both real coordinates of the unscaled embedding by 2, is the lattice 2 Z2, of covolume 2. The statement refuted is the claim that the unscaled covolume 2−r2∣dK∣=1 may serve as the covolume of the scaled lattice 2 Z2 in the equality form of Minkowski's theorem. Assume the Axiom of Choice. The closed disc of radius 6/5 has area 36π/25>4=22⋅1 and is compact, convex and centrally symmetric, so under that claim Minkowski's equality criterion would predict a nonzero point of 2 Z2 in the disc; but every nonzero vector of 2 Z2 has length 2>6/5. The correct covolume of the scaled lattice is 2, and with the threshold 22⋅2=8>36π/25 the true criterion makes no prediction. Mixing the two normalizations is therefore invalid.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The Axiom of Choice, the field K=Q(i), its ring of integers OK=Z[i], the unscaled Minkowski embedding σ, and the closed disc D={x∈R2:∣x∣≤6/5}.

[A1]

The Axiom of Choice implies the Axiom of Countable Choice (AC implies DC implies countable choice), the choice hypothesis of the area computation [F5], invoked in step 1.2; the equality-form Minkowski criterion [F6] is applied under the Axiom of Choice assumed in the statement.

[F1]

For d=−1 the quadratic-field formulas give OQ(−1)=Z[−1]=Z[i] and dK=4⋅(−1)=−4 (Integers in a quadratic field, Discriminant of a quadratic field).

[F2]

K=Q(i) has signature (r1,r2)=(0,1), and the unscaled Minkowski embedding sends x to the pair (Re⁡τ(x),Im⁡τ(x)) of the single complex embedding; hence σ(OK)=Z2 (Unscaled Minkowski embedding).

[F3]

For a nonzero integral ideal a the unscaled image is a full lattice with covol⁡(σ(a))=2−r2∣dK∣ Na; applied to a=OK this gives covol⁡(σ(OK))=2−14=1 (Covolume of an integral ideal lattice).

[F4]

For a full lattice with Z-basis b1,…,bn the covolume is ∣det⁡(b1,…,bn)∣; the scaled lattice 2 Z2 has basis 2e1,2e2, so its covolume is ∣det⁡(2I2)∣=2 (Full Euclidean lattice and covolume).

[F5]

The closed disc of radius ρ has area πρ2 (Polar coordinates decompose Lebesgue measure into r^{n-1} dr d sigma).

[F6]

Minkowski convex-body theorem at equality: a compact convex centrally symmetric C⊆Rn with vol⁡(C)≥2ncovol⁡(Λ) contains a nonzero point of the full lattice Λ (Minkowski convex-body theorem at equality).

[F7]

The finite-remainder Gregory--Leibniz formula at N=7 has partial sum 33976/45045>3/4 and positive remainder, so π>3>25/9. At N=2 the partial sum is 13/15 and the remainder is negative, so π/4<13/15<1 and π<4 (The Gregory-Leibniz series: pi over four equals 1-1/3+1/5-1/7+...).

Proof

1.1F1F2F3

By [F1] the field is K=Q(i) with OK=Z[i] and dK=−4, so r2=1 and [F3] gives covol⁡(σ(OK))=2−14=1, while [F2] identifies the unscaled lattice itself as σ(OK)=Z2.

1.2F5F7A1givenalgebra

The disc D={x∈R2:∣x∣≤6/5} is compact, convex and centrally symmetric, and by [F5], with the Countable Choice hypothesis supplied by [A1], its area is π(6/5)2=36π/25. By [F7], π>3>25/9, so this area exceeds 4=22⋅1.

2.1F4step 1.1

The scaled lattice is Γ:=2 Z2={(2a,2b):a,b∈Z}, the image of OK under the coordinatewise 2-scaling of σ; by [F4] its covolume is covol⁡(Γ)=∣det⁡(2I2)∣=2.

3.1step 2.1algebra

Every nonzero x=(2a,2b)∈Γ has ∣x∣2=2(a2+b2)≥2>36/25=(6/5)2, so ∣x∣>6/5 and x∉D; hence D∩Γ={0}.

4.1F6step 1.2step 3.1

If the unscaled covolume 1 were used as the covolume of Γ, then step 1.2 would verify all hypotheses of the equality-form criterion [F6] for C=D and Λ=Γ, and [F6] would produce a nonzero point of D∩Γ, contradicting step 3.1. This refutes the mixed-convention claim.

5.1F6F7step 2.1step 1.2∎

The correct criterion is not violated: by step 2.1 the true covolume of Γ is 2, so the threshold is 22⋅2=8. By [F7], 36π/25<144/25<8, so the hypothesis of [F6] fails and [F6] yields no lattice point in D.

Remarks

The two normalizations differ by the factor 2 in each complex coordinate: the unscaled convention has covol⁡(σ(a))=2−r2∣dK∣Na, while the scaled convention has covolume ∣dK∣Na and 2-weighted complex coordinates. The numerical coincidence that 36π/25 lies between 4=22⋅1 and 8=22⋅2 is what makes the disc of radius 6/5 a witness: it is large enough for the wrong threshold and too small for the right one.

Sources