Normed elds

Both rational number and real number are prime example of algebraic structure called a
eld .A eld F is a set with two binary operations usually called addition and multiplica-
tion which satisfy the most basic properties ,
a, b F , a+b=b+a (commutativity of addition )
a,b,c F ,a+(b+c)=(a+b)+c (associativity of addition)
0 F such that a F 0 + a = a (Existence of zero )
a F a F such that a + (a) = 0 (Existence of the additive inverse)
a, b F ,a.b = b.a (commutativity of multiplication)
a.(b.c) = (a.b).c (associativity of multiplication)
1 F such that a F

= F/{0}, 1.a = a (Existence of identity )

a F

a
1
F

such that a.a

1
= 1 (Existence of multiplicative inverse)
a, b, c F , a.(b + c) = a.b + a.c (distributivity)
0 = 1
Remarks:
An algebraic structure with two binary operation satisfying the properties (1)-(6)
and (9) is called a commutative ring
Denition: Let F be a eld .A norm on F is a map denoted by ., ie.
. : F R

such that ,
x = 0 if and only if x = 0
xy = xy x, y F
x + y x + y (Triangle inequality )
Note: The norm is called trivial if 0 = 0 and x = 1 for all x = 0
Refreshing the memory
suppose we have a sequence {a
n
} in F then
bounded sequence if there exists a constant C > 0 such that n,
a
n
C
1
null sequence if
lim
n
a
n
= 0
cauchy sequence if for every > 0 , a N N such that n, m > N
a
n
a
m
<
conevergent sequence if for every > 0 , a N N such that n > N
a
n
a <
What can we conclude from here
It follows from the denition that any null sequences converges to zero and it follows
from triangle inequality that any converging sequence is cauchy .In particular every
null sequence is cauchy.
Every Cauchy sequence is bounded .
Let {a
n
} be a cauchy sequence and let {n
1
, n
2
, ...} be an increasing sequence of pos-
itive integers .If the subsequence a
n
1
a
n
2
a
n
3
... is a null sequence then {a
n
} itself is a
null sequence.
Archimedean vs. non-Archimedean absolute values and ultrametric spaces
In constructing the p-adic number eld it becomes important to distinguish between two
types of absolute value function on a eld, namely archimedean and non-archimedean
absolute values.
textbfWhy do we call usual Euclidean absolute value ,Archimedean...?
We call it Archimedean because it has the property that , there is no limit to the size of
the absolute values that can be assigned to integers. We can write this as
sup{|n| : n Z} = +
Non-Archimedean absolute values do not have this property.
In addition to the basic conditions that all absolute values must satisfy, non-Archimedean
absolute values must also satisfy the additional condition .
x + y max{x, y}
which is known as the Ultra-Metric Triangle inequality
2
A beautiful thing to observe is that It is not possible for n to exceed 1, so in the
case of non-Archimedean absolute values we have
sup{n : n Z} = 1
But can we have other type of absolute value ,or these are the only two pos-
sible type of absolute value
To see that these are the only two possible types, suppose we have an absolute value
function such that
sup{n : n Z} = C
where C > 1
Then there must exist an integer m whose absolute value exceeds 1, and so m
k
=
m
k
gets arbitrarily large as k grows, so C cannot be nite. The absolute value function
must be Archimedean in this case. Otherwise, we must have C 1, but since for all
absolute values it must be the case that 1 = 1, it must be the case that C = 1 if C is
nite. Thus we must have a non-Archimedean absolute value in this case and there are
no other possibilities.
Isnt it beautiful !!!!
So what is the motivation behind introducing a new kind of absolute value
A metric for which the ultra-metric inequality is true is called an ultrametric, and a
space endowed with an ultrametric is called an ultrametric space. Such spaces have curi-
ous properties which have been studied extensively. In some ways, however, using a non-
Archimedean absolute value makes analysis much easier than in the usual Archimedean
case. In this regard we have the following result pertaining to Cauchy sequences with re-
spect to a non-Archimedean absolute value function, which is NOT true for Archimedean
absolute values:
Surprising implications of Ultrametric inequallity
If the elements a, x of a non-Archimedean eld F satisfy the inequality x a < a
then , x = a
This property can be restated in the following way: for a, b in a non-Archimedian eld F
a > b = a + b = a,
3
the strongest wins .
Using the geometrical language ,we can say
Any triangle in an ultra-metic space is isosceles and the length of its base does not
exceed the length of the sides .
If . is a non-Archimedean, then any point of an open ball B(a, r) = {x : xa < r}
in F is its center i.e. ,if b is in B(a, r) then B(b, r) = B(a, r). The same is true for closed
balls.
4