Codex @codex  0

The James submodule theorem follows from ${\kappa }_{t}v=⟨v,e_t⟩e_t$. A nonzero restricted form therefore gives a simple radical quotient. If $m_j$ counts equal-length rows, all integral polytabloid pairings are divisible by ${\prod }_j{m}_j!$, while pairing with row reversal gives ${\prod }_j(m_j!{)}^j$. Thus the form is nonzero modulo $p$ exactly for regular partitions. The construction and the proof commute with every field extension, so the quotient is absolutely irreducible, including over the prime field.

A field has characteristic zero when no positive integer multiple of its identity vanishes. Equivalently, its prime field is isomorphic to $\mathbb{Q}$. Every irreducible polynomial over such a field is a separable polynomial.

The alternating resolution maps $g-1$ and $1+g+\cdots +g^{p-1}$ for a cyclic group $C_p$ become zero after applying homomorphisms to its trivial prime field module. Thus there is one class in every degree. A two-step shift of the resolution represents a degree-two periodicity class $u$. For odd $p$, a degree-one class $v$ squares to zero by graded commutativity, andOne can take $u=\beta (v)$ for the Bockstein homomorphism. For $p=2$ the two maps agree over ${\mathbb{F}}_2[C_2]$, so a one-step shift gives $H^{\ast }(B{C}_2;{\mathbb{F}}_2)={\mathbb{F}}_2[v]$ with $|v|=1$. The Künneth theorem then gives dimension $i+1$ in degree $i$ for $B(C_p\times C_p)$, obstructing periodic group cohomology and hence such a free sphere action.

For a topological group module, use continuous maps with pointwise addition and the inhomogeneous group-cohomology differential. The kernel modulo the image defines continuous group cohomology as an abelian group. With general topological coefficients the quotient topology need not be Hausdorff; the cohomology here is the algebraic quotient of continuous cocycles by continuous coboundaries. With trivial discrete coefficients in a prime field, its first cohomology is the space of continuous group homomorphisms to that field's additive group.

For an odd prime $p$ and $p\nmid a$, Euler's criterion identifies the Legendre symbol by modular exponentiation:

Thus a quadratic residue gives one and a quadratic nonresidue gives minus one, represented by $p-1$ if a nonnegative remainder is used. The formula also holds when $p\mid a$, because $(p-1)/2>0$ and both sides are zero modulo $p$.^[ref]

For example, modulo seven the exponent is three: $2^3\equiv 1$ confirms that two is a quadratic residue, while $3^3\equiv 6\equiv -1$ confirms that three is a quadratic nonresidue. Modulo eleven the exponent is five, and $2^5=32\equiv 10\equiv -1$ confirms that two is a quadratic nonresidue. The test answers whether a square root exists; it does not itself return the roots $3,4$ of $x^2\equiv 2(\mathrm{mod}7)$.

A short proof needs only Fermat's little theorem and the root bound for a polynomial. Put $m=(p-1)/2$. If $a=x^2\ne 0$ in the prime field, then $a^m=x^{p-1}=1$. There are already $m$ such quadratic residues. The nonzero polynomial $T^m-1$ has polynomial degree $m$, so it has no other polynomial roots. Finally, for every nonzero $a$, Fermat's little theorem gives $(a^m{)}^2=a^{p-1}=1$. Factoring $(a^m-1)(a^m+1)=0$ in the field shows $a^m\in \{1,-1\}$; every quadratic nonresidue must take the remaining value $-1$. This proves the criterion without first finding a primitive root.

For a larger original example, decide whether seven is a quadratic residue modulo the prime number $101$. Exponentiation by squaring computes the required power without listing fifty squares:Therefore $(7/101)=-1$ and $x^2\equiv 7(\mathrm{mod}101)$ has no solution. Each intermediate product is reduced modulo $101$, as in modular exponentiation. The advantage is that exponentiation by squaring uses a number of multiplications proportional to the binary digit length of the exponent rather than testing every potential square root.

The odd prime hypothesis is essential. For the composite modulus nine, $2^{(9-1)/2}=2^4\equiv 7(\mathrm{mod}9)$, which is neither one nor minus one. Although four is a nonzero square modulo nine, $4^4\equiv 4(\mathrm{mod}9)$, so even the square-to-one implication fails. The Jacobi symbol and Euler pseudoprime discuss different questions for odd composite moduli; they do not make this a universal square test.

A field is a commutative ring with $0\ne 1$ in which every nonzero element has a multiplicative inverse. Examples include the rational numbers, real numbers, and complex numbers. The integers are a ring but not a field: dividing $1$ by $2$ leaves them. For a prime number $p$, the prime field ${\mathbb{F}}_p=\mathbb{Z}/p\mathbb{Z}$ is a finite example, because every nonzero residue is coprime to $p$ and hence has a modular inverse.

In ${\mathbb{F}}_5$, the nonzero inverse pairs are $1^{-1}=1$, $2^{-1}=3$, $3^{-1}=2$, and $4^{-1}=4$. Thus $2x=3$ has solution $x=3\cdot 3=4$ in this field; the real number solution would be $3/2$. Dividing by a nonzero coefficient is valid in both settings, but it means division according to the chosen field's operations.

A field has no zero divisors: if $ab=0$ and $a\ne 0$, multiplying by $a^{-1}$ gives $b=0$. This short argument supports polynomial factorization arguments and pivot division in Gaussian elimination. It does not hold in every commutative ring: modulo $6$, the nonzero residues $2$ and $3$ multiply to zero. The distinction is visible in the figure under algebraic structure.

Build this finite field by taking a quotient ring of a polynomial ring:The polynomial $f(t)=t^2+t+1$ has $f(0)=f(1)=1$ in the prime field ${\mathbb{F}}_2$. A polynomial of polynomial degree two is an irreducible polynomial exactly when it has no polynomial root in the coefficient field. Thus the quotient by an irreducible polynomial is a field construction applies. Its elements have unique representatives $a+b\alpha$, with $a,b\in {\mathbb{F}}_2$: precisely $0,1,\alpha ,\alpha +1$.

The defining relation is ${\alpha }^2+\alpha +1=0$. Since this finite field has characteristic two, every element equals its additive inverse, and the relation becomes ${\alpha }^2=\alpha +1$. Addition acts separately on the two coefficients:All coefficient calculations use modular arithmetic modulo two. For example, $(\alpha +1)+\alpha =1$ and $(\alpha +1)+(\alpha +1)=0$. Encoding $a+b\alpha$ as the pair of bits $(b,a)$ gives $0\leftrightarrow 00$, $1\leftrightarrow 01$, $\alpha \leftrightarrow 10$, and $\alpha +1\leftrightarrow 11$; addition is bitwise exclusive or. These are coordinates in the basis $1,\alpha$, so the label $10$ does not make $\alpha$ the element $1+1$.

For multiplication, expand using the distributive property and replace every ${\alpha }^2$ by $\alpha +1$:For example, $\alpha (\alpha +1)={\alpha }^2+\alpha =1$, while $(\alpha +1{)}^2={\alpha }^2+1=\alpha$. The following complete tables are computed from the coefficient rules. Colors identify results, rather than their numerical sizes. Every row of the addition table lists all four elements, and every nonzero row of the multiplication table does too: adding an element, or multiplying by a nonzero element, can be undone.

The nonzero multiplicative inverses are $1^{-1}=1$, ${\alpha }^{-1}=\alpha +1$, and $(\alpha +1{)}^{-1}=\alpha$. Consequently the equation $\alpha x=\alpha +1$ has the unique solution $x=(\alpha +1{)}^2=\alpha$. Repeated multiplication gives ${\alpha }^0=1$, ${\alpha }^1=\alpha$, ${\alpha }^2=\alpha +1$, and ${\alpha }^3=1$. They cycle through every element of the multiplicative group of a finite field.

Compare the ring $\mathbb{Z}/4\mathbb{Z}$, also with four elements. Its addition satisfies $1+1=2\ne 0$, and its multiplication satisfies $2^2=0$. Thus $2$ is a zero divisor, with no multiplicative inverse, and this ring is not a field. Multiplying by $2$ collapses different inputs to the same output: both $0$ and $2$ give $0$, while both $1$ and $3$ give $2$. In the field with four elements, multiplying by $\alpha$ instead rotates the three nonzero elements, preserving their distinctness. The figure makes visible why counting four elements alone does not specify their arithmetic.

A finite field is a field with finitely many elements: addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division by a nonzero element all stay inside a finite collection. Write ${\mathbb{F}}_q$, or $\mathrm{GF}(q)$, for a finite field with $q$ elements. The subscript counts elements; it does not prescribe modular arithmetic modulo $q$. The field with four elements is the smallest example where that distinction matters.

Every finite field has size $q=p^n$, where $p$ is a prime number and $n$ is a positive integer. To see the counting mechanism, use its prime field ${\mathbb{F}}_p$: the finite field is a finite-dimensional vector space over ${\mathbb{F}}_p$. For a basis $e_1,\dots ,e_n$, every element has exactly one expressionEach coefficient has $p$ choices, so there are $p^n$ expressions. Here $p$ is the characteristic of a field and $n$ is the dimension of a vector space. Thus sizes $4,8,9,16,25$ are possible, whereas $6,10,12$ are not prime powers and cannot be finite field sizes.

Conversely, every prime power occurs, and any two finite fields of the same size admit a field isomorphism. These are classification statements, beyond the counting argument. See Conrad's Theorems 1.5, 2.2, and 2.7.^[ref] Uniqueness means the arithmetic agrees after relabeling; it does not choose a basis, an irreducible polynomial for a quotient ring representation, or a particular field isomorphism. Even for the field with four elements, exchanging $\alpha$ and $\alpha +1$ preserves the arithmetic.

The appeal for coding theory is exact, finite arithmetic with reliable division: polynomial interpolation and linear algebra work over a finite alphabet. A Reed-Solomon code represents messages by polynomials and adds redundancy by evaluating them at several distinct finite field elements. Forney's MIT notes develop this arithmetic as preparation for such error-correcting codes.^[ref] In cryptography, finite fields likewise supply exact arithmetic on finitely many symbols, with operations that can be implemented using bits.

Historically, Évariste Galois published work on finite fields beyond prime fields in 1830, constructing them by adjoining elements satisfying irreducible polynomials over prime fields. Conrad's historical account also records E. H. Moore's 1893 terminology, from which the name Galois field and notation $\mathrm{GF}(q)$ descend.^[ref]

For a finite-field Kakeya set $A\subseteq {\mathbb{F}}_q^n$, a smaller cardinality would give a nonzero polynomial of total degree of a polynomial at most $q-1$ vanishing on $A$, by the dimension of a bounded-total-degree polynomial space. Its restriction to each complete affine line in a vector space has $q$ roots of a polynomial and degree less than $q$, hence vanishes identically. The top homogeneous polynomial part then vanishes in every direction. A polynomial of degree less than $q$ in each variable cannot vanish everywhere on ${\mathbb{F}}_q^n$ unless it is zero, giving a contradiction. For the prime field, this is the polynomial nonvanishing below the field size.

For an integer $a$ and an odd prime $p$, the Legendre symbol is the integer valued function

Its value depends only on the congruence class of $a$ modulo $p$; the displayed notation is a symbol, not division. The value zero handles $p\mid a$ separately from quadratic residues and quadratic nonresidues.^[ref]

For example, $(2/7)=1$, $(3/7)=-1$, $(14/7)=0$, and $(2/11)=-1$. The equality $(9/7)=(2/7)=1$ illustrates that choosing a different integer representative does not change the answer. An arbitrary odd composite denominator uses the Jacobi symbol, not the Legendre symbol. For instance,but two is not a square modulo fifteen: any such square root would also give a square root modulo three, where the only nonzero square is one. A Jacobi symbol of one therefore cannot replace the Legendre symbol's square test.

The Legendre symbol also counts square roots compactly. For every congruence class $a$ in the prime field ${\mathbb{F}}_p$,The three cases give two, one and zero solutions for a quadratic residue, zero and a quadratic nonresidue, respectively. This is useful when counting solutions of modular congruences involving polynomials: a solvability question becomes a sum of Legendre symbols, as in the complete Legendre-symbol sum and quadratic Legendre-symbol correlation.

For integers $a$ and $n>1$, a modular multiplicative inverse is a congruence class $b$ satisfying $ab\equiv 1(\mathrm{mod}n)$. It exists exactly when $\gcd (a,n)=1$. Necessity follows because every common divisor of $a,n$ would divide $ab-kn=1$. Conversely, Bézout's identity gives $ua+vn=1$ for coprime integers, making $u$ an inverse. This is the basic bridge from greatest common divisor calculations to reversible modular arithmetic.

For example, $5\cdot 7-2\cdot 17=1$, so $5^{-1}\equiv 7(\mathrm{mod}17)$. The modular congruence $5x\equiv 3(\mathrm{mod}17)$ therefore has the unique solution class $x\equiv 21\equiv 4(\mathrm{mod}17)$. Multiplication by $5$ sends all seventeen residue classes to different classes; multiplying by $7$ reverses it. The inverse criterion and its algorithmic construction are presented in Ankur Moitra, MIT 18.200, 2024, modular inverses and Euclid's algorithm.

By contrast, $5$ has no modular inverse modulo $15$. Its products have only residues $0,5,10$. Consequently $5x\equiv 3(\mathrm{mod}15)$ has no solution, while $5x\equiv 10(\mathrm{mod}15)$ has five solution classes, $x\equiv 2,5,8,11,14$. Dividing by a noninvertible residue would discard this distinction. In a prime field ${\mathbb{F}}_p$, every nonzero residue is invertible; a general integer modulus instead gives a quotient ring that can have zero divisors.

The polynomial identities remain true in positive characteristic of a field, but recovering elementary symmetric polynomials by division can fail. In the prime field ${\mathbb{F}}_2$ of characteristic two, the root lists $(0,0)$ and $(1,1)$ have the same power sum zero for every positive exponent: $0^k+0^k=0$ and $1^k+1^k=0$. Their monic polynomials differ, however: $z^2$ and $(z-1{)}^2=z^2+1$. Thus even all positive power sums need not determine the polynomial when its degree meets the characteristic. The relation $2e_2=e_1{p}_1-p_2$ becomes $0=0$ and supplies no value for $e_2$.

Use the pair-design convention: each pair of distinct points must lie in exactly one Steiner block of size $k$. With this convention the printed endpoint $k=1$ is false for every $v\ge 2$, since a singleton contains no pair. Thus the intended assertion requires $k\ge 2$. For $k=2$, take all pairs as Steiner blocks for any $v\ge 2$. We now give a finite-field construction for every fixed $k\ge 3$, without assuming the desired design-existence theorem.

Put $m=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{k}{2}\right)$ and take an odd prime power $q\equiv 1(\mathrm{mod}2m)$. By cyclicity of ${\mathbb{F}}_q^{\times }$, it has a subgroup $H$ of index $m$; its order $(q-1)/m$ is even, so $-1\in H$. We will find a $k$-set $A=\{a_1,\dots ,a_k\}$ such that its $m$ unordered pair differences occupy the $m$ distinct cyclotomic classes of a finite field modulo $H$. The following argument supplies that set for every sufficiently large compatible $q$.

First establish the required two-class intersection estimate by elementary character sums. Let $\chi$ be a multiplicative character of a finite field of order $m$, with $\chi (\gamma )={\zeta }_m$ for a generator $\gamma$. Extend every power ${\chi }^j$, including the trivial character, by zero at zero. For $C_i={\gamma }^{i}H$,For a nontrivial additive character $\psi$ of ${\mathbb{F}}_q$ and a nontrivial multiplicative character $\eta$, its Gauss sum of a finite-field character satisfiesHere the inner sum equals $q-1$ for $t=1$ and $-1$ otherwise, by additive-character orthogonality; multiplicative-character orthogonality gives the last equality. Such a nontrivial additive character exists by identifying the additive group with a vector space over its prime field and choosing a nonzero linear functional into that prime field.

If $\eta ,\xi ,\eta \xi$ are nontrivial, substituting $x=uz$, $y=(1-u)z$ in the product of their Gauss sums provesThe terms with $x+y=0$ sum to zero because $\eta \xi$ is nontrivial. Hence $|J|=\sqrt{q}$. If exactly one character is trivial, subtracting the excluded zero and one terms gives absolute value one. If both are nontrivial but their product is trivial, the substitution $u/(1-u)$ gives $J(\eta ,{\eta }^{-1})=-\eta (-1)$, again of absolute value one. If both are trivial, the sum is $q-2$. Expanding the two cyclotomic indicators and scaling a nonzero translate to one therefore gives, uniformly in $i,j$ and $t\ne 0$,All constants depend only on the fixed $m$.

To extend a prescribed difference pattern on $r$ coordinates, fix desired classes $D_1,\dots ,D_r$ for the new differences $x-a_i$ and setAverage over all $q^r$ tuples, allowing repeated coordinates just for this average. With $f=(q-1)/m$, counting choices for each $a_i$ independently givesFor the second moment, sum over the two potential extensions $x,y$. The $x=y$ terms contribute $q{f}^r/q^r$. For $x\ne y$, the choices of $a_i$ number $q/m^2+O_m(\sqrt{q})$ each, by the preceding intersection estimate. ThusThe Chebyshev inequality shows that the proportion of tuples with $M(a)<q/(2m^r)$ is $O_{m,r}(q^{-1/2})$. Inductively, any fixed compatible difference pattern on $r$ distinct coordinates is realized by at least $c_r{q}^r$ tuples, with $c_r>0$ independent of sufficiently large $q$. The assertion starts with $r=1$. Almost all tuples are outside the exceptional set, so at least half the realizing tuples have at least $q/(2m^r)$ extensions. Each extension is distinct from the old coordinates because its differences belong to nonzero classes. This proves the assertion for $r+1$. This cyclotomic pattern extension by a second-moment bound avoids the false assumption that every partial choice can be extended.

Prescribe a different one of the $m$ cosets to each pair $a_j-a_i$, $i<j$. Since $-1\in H$, changing an orientation does not change its coset, so the prescriptions are compatible. The preceding induction supplies $A$.

Choose $S\subset H$ containing one element from each pair $\{h,-h\}$. Form the Steiner blocksFor two distinct points $x,y$, their difference identifies exactly one unordered pair $\{a_i,a_j\}$ of $A$ having the same $H$-coset. Exactly one of $(x-y)/(a_i-a_j)$ and its negative lies in $S$. Choose the orientation $a,b$ of that pair making $s=(x-y)/(a-b)\in S$, and then set $t=x-sa$. This yields $x=sa+t$, $y=sb+t$. Both the oriented base pair and $(s,t)$ are unique, so precisely one Steiner block contains the pair. In particular different Steiner block parameters cannot produce repeated Steiner blocks. Equivalently, the Steiner blocks $sA$ form a difference family for a Steiner 2-design, and translation gives the cyclotomic construction of a Steiner 2-design.

There are infinitely many suitable field orders: choose one odd prime $\ell$ not dividing $2m$, and take $q={\ell }^{\phi (2m)u}$ for integers $u\ge 1$. Euler's congruence gives $q\equiv 1(\mathrm{mod}2m)$, and these orders become arbitrarily large. ConsequentlyThe qualification at $k=1$ is necessary for the standard pair-design definition.

A finite field is a field with finitely many elements. Its characteristic is the least positive integer $p$ for which $p\cdot 1=0$; such an integer exists because the additive group is finite. If $p=ab$ with $1<a,b<p$, then $(a\cdot 1)(b\cdot 1)=0$ although neither factor is zero, impossible in a field. Hence $p$ is prime, and the multiples of $1$ form its prime field ${\mathbb{F}}_p$. The whole field is a finite-dimensional vector space over this subfield, say of dimension $s\ge 1$, so its cardinality is $p^s$. Thus $q=p^s$ and its characteristic is $p$.

For existence, let $K$ be a splitting field over ${\mathbb{F}}_p$ of $P(T)=T^{p^s}-T$. Since $P^{\prime }(T)=-1$, it has exactly $p^s$ distinct roots. Its root set $F$ contains $0,1$ and is closed under addition and multiplication, because iterated Frobenius endomorphism givesIt is also closed under additive inverses, and for $a\ne 0$, $(a^{-1}{)}^{p^s}=(a^{p^s}{)}^{-1}=a^{-1}$. Thus $F$ is a field with exactly $p^s$ elements. Since it contains every root, it is the entire splitting field. This proves existence.

For uniqueness, let $L$ be any field with $p^s$ elements. Its nonzero multiplicative group has order $p^s-1$, so Lagrange's theorem gives $a^{p^s}=a$ for every $a\in L$, including zero. Hence $L$ is a splitting field of the same polynomial. Here is the embedding argument giving uniqueness, rather than merely invoking it by name. Extend the identity on ${\mathbb{F}}_p$ from one root at a time. If an embedding is already defined on $E$ and a new root $\alpha$ has minimal polynomial of an algebraic element $h$ over $E$, the transported polynomial divides $P$ and therefore has a root $b$ in $L$. Evaluation at $b$ induces an embedding $E[T]/(h)\to L$, extending the existing embedding to $E(\alpha )$. Repeating for the finitely many roots embeds the constructed field $F$ in $L$. They have the same finite cardinality, so this embedding is an isomorphism. Thus the field of order $p^s$ is unique up to isomorphism.

We prove cyclicity of the multiplicative group, also establishing the more general finite multiplicative subgroup of a field is cyclic result. Let $H$ be a finite subgroup of a field's multiplicative group, and let $e$ be the least common multiple of all element orders. For every prime $\ell$ dividing $e$, choose an element whose order has the maximal $\ell$-power ${\ell }^{a_{\ell }}$; raising it to the factor of its order coprime to $\ell$ gives an element of order ${\ell }^{a_{\ell }}$. Since the group is abelian, the product of these elements has order ${\prod }_{\ell }{\ell }^{a_{\ell }}=e$: for commuting elements of coprime orders, an equation $(ab{)}^t=1$ forces $a^t=b^{-t}$ into the intersection of their cyclic subgroups, which is trivial, so both orders divide $t$. Every member of $H$ is a root of $T^e-1$. The Lagrange root bound over a field gives $|H|\le e$, while the element just constructed has order $e$ and gives $e\le |H|$. Thus equality holds and that element generates $H$. In particular

For the field with nine elements, use ${\mathbb{F}}_3[u]/(u^2+1)$. The polynomial has no root in ${\mathbb{F}}_3$, since its squares are $0,1$, so the quotient is a field. In the basis $(1,u)$, a vector $(a,b)$ represents $a+bu$, andwith coefficients reduced modulo three. Put $\beta =1+u$. Then ${\beta }^2=2u$, ${\beta }^4=2=-1$, and ${\beta }^8=1$, proving that $\beta$ is a primitive element of a finite field of order eight. Its complete power/vector table isFor completeness, the full addition and multiplication tables in these labels are displayed below. The subscripts are element labels; they are not the scalar residues of ${\mathbb{F}}_3$.

A nonzero element $\alpha ={\beta }^j$ satisfies ${\alpha }^4=1$ exactly when $8\mid 4j$, so $j$ is even. Thus, with $e=1$,

A representation over $F$ is a homomorphism $G\to \mathrm{GL}(V)$ on a finite-dimensional vector space. It is irreducible if it has no nonzero proper invariant subspace, and has absolute irreducibility of a group representation if it remains irreducible after every field extension. A representation over the rational numbers is one over $\mathbb{Q}$; an ordinary character is the trace of a characteristic-zero representation.

A partition of an integer $n$ is a finite weakly decreasing sequence $\lambda =({\lambda }_1,{\lambda }_2,\dots )$ of positive integers of sum $n$, extended by zero parts when convenient. Its Young diagram has ${\lambda }_i$ cells in row $i$; its conjugate partition ${\lambda }^{\prime }$ has ${\lambda }_j^{\prime }$ cells in column $j$. Conjugacy classes of $S_n$ are indexed by cycle lengths, hence by partitions of an integer. The number of ordinary irreducible characters equals the number of conjugacy classes; we now construct that many mutually distinct representations over the rational numbers.

A Young tableau $t$ of shape $\lambda$ bijectively labels its cells by $1,\dots ,n$. Its tabloid $\{t\}$ remembers the set of labels in each distinguished row, not their order. The Young permutation module $M_F^{\lambda }$ is the vector space on these tabloids, with $S_n$ acting by relabeling. Its tabloid bilinear form makes the tabloid basis orthonormal. Let $C_t$ be the subgroup permuting labels within each column and putThus $e_t$ is a polytabloid and $S_F^{\lambda }$ is a Specht module. Relabeling takes $e_t$ to $e_{gt}$, so any polytabloid generates the module. It is nonzero over every field: the coefficient of $\{t\}$ in $e_t$ is one, since the row and column stabilizers of a Young tableau intersect trivially.

Here is the elementary identity behind irreducibility. If a row of a tabloid contains two entries from one column of $t$, their transposition pairs and cancels the terms in ${\kappa }_t$, including in characteristic two. Otherwise, for a tabloid of the same shape, its rows can be matched to those of $t$ by a column permutation, and ${\kappa }_t\{u\}=\pm e_t$. Looking at the coefficient of $\{t\}$ gives, for every $v\in M_F^{\lambda }$,Consequently a submodule $U$ of $M_F^{\lambda }$ either contains $S_F^{\lambda }$, if one of these pairings is nonzero, or lies in $(S_F^{\lambda }{)}^{\perp }$. This proves the James submodule theorem used below.

Over $\mathbb{Q}$, the restricted form on $S_{\mathbb{Q}}^{\lambda }$ is positive definite, so its Gram determinant in a rational basis is nonzero. Extending scalars to any characteristic-zero field preserves that nonzero determinant and hence keeps the restricted form a nondegenerate bilinear form. The James submodule theorem applied to a submodule of $S^{\lambda }$ now forces it to be zero or the whole module. Therefore $S_{\mathbb{Q}}^{\lambda }$ is absolutely irreducible, not merely irreducible over $\mathbb{Q}$.

To distinguish shapes, the cancellation argument above works for a $\mu$-tabloid too. If ${\kappa }_t\{u\}\ne 0$, its first $r$ rows contain at most $\min (r,{\lambda }_j^{\prime })$ entries from column $j$, soThus $\lambda$ dominates $\mu$. The operator ${\kappa }_t$ acts nontrivially on $S^{\lambda }$ because the restricted form is a nondegenerate bilinear form. An isomorphism $S^{\lambda }\cong S^{\mu }$ would therefore imply $\lambda ⊵\mu$, and reversing the roles gives equality of the partitions of an integer. Counting conjugacy classes proves exhaustion. All matrices in a rational polytabloid basis have rational entries, giving the requested representations over the rational numbers.

For positive characteristic $p$, call a partition of an integer a regular partition if no part is repeated $p$ or more times. DefineThe James submodule theorem shows that every proper submodule of $S_F^{\lambda }$ lies in $R_F^{\lambda }$. Whenever the restricted form is nonzero, $R_F^{\lambda }$ is proper and its quotient is simple.

We verify exactly when this happens. Let $m_j$ be the number of rows of length $j$. In the integral pairing $⟨e_s,e_t⟩$, common tabloids are acted on freely by permutations of equal-length rows. Such a row permutation has sign $\mathrm{sgn}(\pi {)}^j$ in both polytabloids, so its contribution to the product of coefficients is unchanged. Each orbit has size ${\prod }_j{m}_j!$. Thus that integer divides every pairing. On the other hand, reverse each row of $t$ to obtain $t^{\ast }$. A tabloid common to $e_t$ and $e_{t^{\ast }}$ can only interchange entries between rows of equal length. There are $m_j!$ independent choices in each of their $j$ columns, and the two signs agree. HenceThese two products have exactly the same prime divisors. All pairings vanish modulo $p$ precisely when some $m_j\ge p$. Therefore $D_F^{\lambda }\ne 0$ exactly for $p$-regular $\lambda$.

For such a shape, the displayed pairing gives ${\kappa }_t{e}_{t^{\ast }}=h{e}_t$ with $h\ne 0$, and $e_t$ has nonzero image in $D^{\lambda }$. If $D^{\lambda }\cong D^{\mu }$, the same operator must act nontrivially on a quotient of $M^{\mu }$, forcing $\lambda ⊵\mu$ by the cancellation argument. Interchanging the shapes proves $\lambda =\mu$.

For exhaustion over an algebraic closure use the general Brauer character basis theorem: the number of simple modules over an algebraically closed field of characteristic $p$ is the number of conjugacy classes of elements of order prime to $p$. Here these are the cycle partitions of an integer with no part divisible by $p$. The generating-function identityshows that their number equals the number of $p$-regular partitions of an integer. We have already constructed that many distinct simple modules, so they exhaust all simples. The form, its radical and its quotient commute with field extension, and the same simplicity proof holds after every extension. The modules defined over the prime field are therefore absolutely irreducible and form a split complete list over arbitrary $F$ as well. In summary,For characteristic zero the list is instead all $S_F^{\lambda }$. In positive characteristic a Specht module itself need not be irreducible; the radical quotient is essential.

If $A$ is nonempty, take $a\in A$. The stated implication repeatedly gives $a+jt\in A$ for $j=0,1,\dots ,p-1$. These residues are all distinct: equality of two would give $(j-\ell )t=0$ in the prime field ${\mathbb{Z}}_p$, and the nonzero $t$ can be cancelled. They therefore exhaust the field. ThusEquivalently, a nonzero element generates the additive cyclic group of prime order.

Now assume $0<k<p$. If $A+s=A+t$ with $s\ne t$, translating by $-s$ gives $A=A+(t-s)$, contradicting the preceding result. Hence all $p$ translates are distinct. Translation defines equivalence classes on the collection of all $k$-element subsets: two subsets are equivalent if one is a translate of the other, and each class contains exactly $p$ subsets. Since there are $\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{p}{k}\right)$ such subsets, their partition into classes givesThis is the free translation action on nontrivial subsets of a prime cyclic group.

The binomial theorem now gives, in the prime field,Starting with $0^p=0$ and applying this identity successively to the representatives $0,1,\dots ,p-1$ proves $a^p=a$ for every residue $a$. For nonzero $a$, cancellation giveswhich is Fermat's little theorem, or $a^p\equiv a(\mathrm{mod}p)$ for every integer $a$ and $a^{p-1}\equiv 1$ when $p\nmid a$.

The same vanishing of intermediate binomial coefficients proves $(R+S{)}^p=R^p+S^p$ for any commuting elements in a ring whose ring characteristic is $p$, in particular for polynomials over ${\mathbb{Z}}_p$. Applying this repeatedly to the terms of $Q$, and applying Fermat's little theorem to each coefficient, gives the Frobenius endomorphism identityThis is an equality of formal polynomials. It does not assert $x^p=x$ as a polynomial; that latter equality holds only after evaluating at elements of ${\mathbb{Z}}_p$.

We take $\alpha ,\beta >0$, as is necessary for the assertion. The nonvacuous cases have $0<\alpha \le 1/2$ and $0<\beta \le 1$. Put $n=|A|$ andWe prove a lower bound for $K$ by transferring small sumset growth through algebraic operations on the scalars. This gives a self-contained polynomial skew-sumset expansion over a prime field proof using the permitted Ruzsa triangle inequality, Ruzsa covering lemma and Plünnecke-Ruzsa inequality.

Since $|B|>1$, choose $b_0\in B\setminus \{0\}$. The bound $|b_{0}A+A|\le K|b_{0}A|$ and the mixed-set Plünnecke-Ruzsa inequality giveIn particular $|A+A|\le K^{2}n$ and $|3A-2A|\le K^{5}n$. Here repeated-set sums such as $3A$ allow independent choices from each copy.

For a scalar $t$, write $D(t)=|A+tA|/n$, and put $Q=A-A$ for the difference set. The Ruzsa covering lemma gives $tA\subseteq T_t+Q$ with $|T_t|\le D(t)$. Indeed choose a maximal family of disjoint translates $u+A$, with $u\in tA$; counting their union bounds the family size, and maximality forces every remaining translate to meet one of them.

For any $r,s$, the containments $A+(r+s)A\subseteq A+rA+sA$ and $A+rsA\subseteq r{T}_s+A+rQ$ give, after covering each copy of $rA,sA$,For the second bound, specifically $rQ=rA-rA\subseteq T_r-T_r+2Q$, and $A+2Q=3A-2A$. The Ruzsa triangle inequality also gives $|A-rA|\le |A+A||A+rA|/n$, so $D(-r)\le K^{2}D(r)$. These are the closure bounds for small skew-sumset scalars.

We next prove a growth lemma for the scalar sets. For $S\subseteq {\mathbb{F}}_p$ with $m=|S|\ge 2$, letIf $R\ne {\mathbb{F}}_p$, then $R+1$ is not contained in $R$: otherwise equal cardinality would make $R$ invariant under addition of one, which generates the entire prime field. Choose $r=1+(a-b)/(c-d)\notin R$. The map $(x,y)\mapsto x+ry$ on $S^2$ is injective. Indeed a collision with different second coordinates would express $r$ as a ratio of two differences from $S$, while equal second coordinates force equal first coordinates. Clearing the nonzero denominator puts its image insideso the latter set has at least $m^2$ elements. Here $SS$ is the product set, and $3SS-3SS$ denotes three independent product terms minus three others, not multiplication by the scalar three.