1 i j k -1 -i -j -k

1 1 i j k -1 -i -j -k
i i -1 k -j -i 1 -k j
j j -k -1 i -j k 1 -i
k k j -i -1 -k -j i 1
-1 -1 -i -j -k 1 i j k
-i -i 1 -k j i -1 k -j
-j -j k 1 -i j -k -1 i
-k -k -j i 1 k j -i -1

Robert “Dr. Bob” Gardner

ETSU Abstract Algebra Club
Spring 2017
 Study of the Quaternions
Geometrically: The quaternions, like the complex numbers, can
be used to perform rotations in 3 or 4 dimensions.

Analytically: A new analytic theory of functions of a

“quaternionic variable” has recently been developed. Many
results parallel those of complex analytic funtions.

Algebraically: Here we introduce the quaternion group of order

8 and the quaternions as a noncommutative division ring. We
present a Fundamental Theorem of Algebra for Quaternions
and describe the structure of the set of roots of a polynomial.
The proofs of the results are online in my notes for Modern
Algebra 2 (MATH 5420) in the chapter on rings:
http://faculty.etsu.edu/gardnerr/5410/notes/
Quaternions-Algebraic-Supplement.pdf
 The
Quaternion
Group
 Small Groups
ORDER GROUPS COMMENTS
1 ℤ1 Trivial Group
2 ℤ2
3 ℤ3 ≅ 𝐴3
4 ℤ4
𝑉 ≅ ℤ2 × ℤ2 Klein-4, smallest noncyclic group
5 ℤ5
6 ℤ6 ≅ ℤ2 × ℤ3
𝑆3 ≅ 𝐷3 Smallest nonabelian group
7 ℤ7
8 ℤ8
ℤ2 × ℤ4
ℤ2 × ℤ2 × ℤ2
𝐷4 Nonabelian
𝑄8 Quaternion group, nonabelian
So the quaternion group is the smallest group that
does not fall into a familiar category.
 Hungerford’s Definition
Hungerford defines the quaternion
group in his Section I.2 (Homo-
morphisms and Subgroups) as the
multiplicative group generated by
the matrices:
0 1 0 𝑖
𝐴= and B = .
−1 0 𝑖 0

This is introduced in Exercise I.2.3 on page

33, where the exercise is to show that the
group is of order 8.
 Hungerford Changes Notation
In Exercise II.6.3 Hungerford
considers the set ±1, ±𝑖, ±𝑗, ±𝑘
with multiplication given by the
equations 𝑖 2 = 𝑗 2 = 𝑘 2 = −1,
𝑖𝑗 = 𝑘, 𝑗𝑘 = 𝑖, 𝑘𝑖 = 𝑗, 𝑗𝑖 = −𝑘,
𝑘𝑗 = −𝑖, 𝑖𝑘 = −𝑗, and the usual
rules for multiplying by ±1. The
exercise is to show that the
resulting group is isomorphic to
the quaternion group.
 1 Cayley Digraph for 𝑄8
i j I give this as an example of the
use of Cayley digraphs in
Introduction to Modern Algebra
(Section I.7 of Fraleigh).
k -k
1 i j k -1 -i -j -k
1 1 i j k -1 -i -j -k
-j -i i i -1 k -j -i 1 -k j
j j -k -1 i -j k 1 -i
k k j -i -1 -k -j i 1
-1
-1 -1 -i -j -k 1 i j k
Multiplication on the right by i is
-i -i 1 -k j i -1 k -j
represented by a blue arrow.
-j -j k 1 -i j -k -1 i
Multiplication on the right by j is
-k -k -j i 1 k j -i -1
represented by a red arrow.
An Easier Diagram for the 𝑄8 Table

𝑖
𝑘𝑖 = 𝑗 𝑖𝑗 = 𝑘

𝑘 𝑗

𝑗𝑘 = 𝑖
 An Easier Diagram for the 𝑄8 Table

𝑖
𝑖𝑘 = −𝑗 𝑗𝑖 = −𝑘

𝑘 𝑗

𝑘𝑗 = −𝑖

In fact, cross products of the vectors 𝑖 , 𝑗 , 𝑘 ∈ ℝ3 behave

exactly like this under cross products:
𝑖Ԧ × 𝑗Ԧ = 𝑘 = −Ԧ𝑗 × 𝑖Ԧ, 𝑗Ԧ × 𝑘 = 𝑖Ԧ = −𝑘 × 𝑗Ԧ, 𝑘 × 𝑖Ԧ = 𝑗Ԧ = −Ԧ𝑖 × 𝑘.
Normal Subgroups of the Quarternion Group 1
In Hungerford’s Exercise I.5.8, it is shown that every
subgroup of 𝑄8 is normal. By Lagrange’s Theorem
(Fraleigh’s Theorem 10.10, Hungerford’s Corollary
I.4.6), the only possible orders of subgroups are 1, 2, 4,
and 8. Trivially, the improper groups of order 1 and 8
are normal. Every subgroup of index 2 (that is, of order
half the size of the larger group… assuming finite
groups) is a normal subgroup by Fraleigh’s Exercise
15.34 and Hungerford’s Exercise I.5.1, so the subgroups
of order 4 must be normal. Now for subgroups of order
2, we must find an element of order 2 in 𝑄8 …
Normal Subgroups of the Quarternion Group 2
The only element of 𝑄8 of order 2 is −1, so the only subgroup of
order 2 is 𝑁 = {1, −1}. For any 𝑞 ∈ 𝑄8 , we “clearly” have
𝑞 1 𝑞 −1 = 1. Less clear, but also true is that for any 𝑞 ∈ 𝑄8 we
have 𝑞 −1 𝑞−1 = −1. So for any 𝑞 ∈ 𝑄8 we have 𝑞 1 𝑞 −1 = 1,
and so 𝑞 𝑁 𝑞 −1 ⊂ 𝑁; hence 𝑁 is a normal subgroup. Ergo(!), all
subgroups of 𝑄8 are normal.
1 i j k -1 -i -j -k
1 1 i j k -1 -i -j -k
i i -1 k -j -i 1 -k j
j j -k -1 i -j k 1 -i
k k j -i -1 -k -j i 1
-1 -1 -i -j -k 1 i j k
-i -i 1 -k j i -1 k -j
-j -j k 1 -i j -k -1 i
-k -k -j i 1 k j -i -1
 Subgroups of the Quarternion Group
We just established that every subgroup of 𝑄8 is
normal, without actually finding the subgroups (except
for one)! We find that the subgroup diagram of 𝑄8 is:
𝑄8

1, −1, 𝑖, −𝑖 1, −1, 𝑗, −𝑗 1, −1, 𝑘, −𝑘

1, −1

1
 For Fans of Galois Theory
The quaternion group, 𝑄8 , is the Galois group Aut ℚ ℚ 𝛼

where 𝛼 = 2 + 2 3 + 3 . That is, the group of

automorphisms of the algebraic extension of the rationals, ℚ, by
𝛼 is (isomorphic to) 𝑄8 . The irreducible polynomial for 𝛼 is 𝑥 8 −
24𝑥 6 + 144𝑥 4 − 288𝑥 2 + 144.

This is Exercise 27 on page

584 of Dummit and Foote’s
Abstract Algebra, 3rd Edition.
It is an exercise with 6 parts.
 The
Quaternions
 The Quarternions: A Prequel
The quaternions are based on writing linear
combinations (with real coefficients) of the elements in
𝑄8 and then adding and multiplying them. This
requires more than just a group structure, though.
1 i j k -1 -i -j -k
1 1 i j k -1 -i -j -k
i i -1 k -j -i 1 -k j
j j -k -1 i -j k 1 -i
k k j -i -1 -k -j i 1
-1 -1 -i -j -k 1 i j k
-i -i 1 -k j i -1 k -j
-j -j k 1 -i j -k -1 i
-k -k -j i 1 k j -i -1
 Rings
Definition (Hungerford’s III.1.1). A ring is a nonempty set 𝑅
together with two binary operations (denoted + and
multiplication) such that
(i) 𝑅, + is an abelian group.
(ii) 𝑎𝑏 𝑐 = 𝑎 𝑏𝑐 for all 𝑎, 𝑏, 𝑐 in 𝑅 (i.e., multiplication is
associative).
(iii) 𝑎 𝑏 + 𝑐 = 𝑎𝑏 + 𝑎𝑐 and 𝑎 + 𝑏 𝑐 = 𝑎𝑐 + 𝑏𝑐 (left and right
distribution of multiplication over +).
If in addition,
(iv) 𝑎𝑏 = 𝑏𝑎 for 𝑎, 𝑏 in 𝑅
then 𝑅 is a commutative ring. If 𝑅 contains an element 1𝑅 such
that
(v) 1𝑅 𝑎 = 𝑎1𝑅 = 𝑎 for all 𝑎 in 𝑅,
then 𝑅 is a ring with identity (or unity).
 Examples of Rings
You are familiar with the following rings:
• ℂ, ℝ, ℚ, and ℤ
• All 2 × 2 matrices with real entries, ℳ2 ℝ

The rings ℂ, ℝ, ℚ, and ℤ are commutative rings with

unity. ℳ2 ℝ is a ring with unity, but it is not
commutative. The ring 2ℤ is a commutative ring which
does not have unity.
 Zero Divisors
Definition (Hungerford’s III.1.3). A nonzero element
𝑎 in the ring 𝑅 is a left (respectively, right) zero divisor if
there exists nonzero 𝑏 in 𝑅 such that 𝑎𝑏 = 0
(respectively 𝑏𝑎 = 0). A zero divisor is an element of 𝑅
which is both a left and right zero divisor.
 Examples of Zero Divisors
The integers modulo 𝑛, ℤ𝑛 ≅ ℤ/𝑛ℤ, forms a ring where
multiplication of equivalence classes is defined in terms of
multiplication of representative. If 𝑛 is a composite
number (and only if, in fact), then ℤ𝑛 has zero divisors. For
example, 2ത is a zero divisor in ℤ6 since 2ത × 3ത = 6ത = 0ത .

In the ring ℳ2 ℝ , there are zero divisors. For example

1 1 1 1 0 0
= .
1 1 −1 −1 0 0
1 1 1 1
So is a left divisor of zero and is a right
1 1 −1 −1
divisor of zero.
 The Quaternions: Definition
Definition (Hungerford’s page 117). Let 𝑆 = 1, 𝑖, 𝑗, 𝑘 . Let ℍ
be the additive abelian group ℝ⨁ℝ⨁ℝ⨁ℝ and write the
elements of ℍ as formal sums 𝑎0 , 𝑎1 , 𝑎2 , 𝑎3 = 𝑎0 1 + 𝑎1 𝑖 +
𝑎2 𝑗 + 𝑎3 𝑘. We often drop the “1” in “𝑎0 1” and replace it with
just 𝑎0 . Addition in ℍ is then:
𝑎0 + 𝑎1 𝑖 + 𝑎2 𝑗 + 𝑎3 𝑘 + 𝑏0 + 𝑏1 𝑖 + 𝑏2 𝑗 + 𝑏3 𝑘 =
𝑎0 + 𝑏0 + 𝑎1 + 𝑏1 𝑖 + 𝑎2 + 𝑏2 𝑗 + 𝑎3 + 𝑏3 𝑘.
We turn ℍ into a ring by defining multiplication as
𝑎0 + 𝑎1 𝑖 + 𝑎2 𝑗 + 𝑎3 𝑘 𝑏0 + 𝑏1 𝑖 + 𝑏2 𝑗 + 𝑏3 𝑘 = ሺ𝑎0 𝑏0 −
 The Quaternions: An Observation
The product above can be interpreted by considering:
(i) multiplication in the formal sum is associative,
(ii) 𝑟𝑖 = 𝑖𝑟, 𝑟𝑗 = 𝑗𝑟, 𝑟𝑘 = 𝑘𝑟 for all 𝑟 in 𝑅,
(iii) 𝑖 2 = 𝑗 2 = 𝑘 2 = 𝑖𝑗𝑘 = −1, 𝑖𝑗 = −𝑗𝑖 = 𝑘,
𝑗𝑘 = −𝑘𝑗 = 𝑖, 𝑘𝑖 = −𝑖𝑘 = 𝑗.
The resulting ring is the ring of real quaternions (we still need to
verify associativity of multiplication and distribution) . The
notation ℍ is in honor of Sir William Rowan Hamilton (1805-
1865) who discovered them in 1843.
 The Complex Numbers: Algebra
The complex numbers can be defined as ordered pairs of
real numbers,
ℂ = 𝑎, 𝑏 𝑎, 𝑏 ∈ ℝ ,
with addition defined as
𝑎, 𝑏 + 𝑐, 𝑑 = 𝑎 + 𝑐, 𝑏 + 𝑑
and multiplication defined as
𝑎, 𝑏 𝑐, 𝑑 = 𝑎𝑐 − 𝑏𝑑, 𝑏𝑐 + 𝑎𝑑 .
We then have that ℂ is a field with additive identity 0,0
and multiplicative identity 1,0 . The additive inverse of
𝑎, 𝑏 is −𝑎, −𝑏 and the multiplicative inverse of 𝑎, 𝑏 ≠
𝑎 −𝑏
0,0 is , . We commonly denote 𝑎, 𝑏 as
𝑎2 +𝑏 2 𝑎2 +𝑏 2
“𝑎 + 𝑖𝑏” so that 𝑖 = 0,1 and we notice that 𝑖 2 = −1.
 The Complex Numbers: Geometry
The complex numbers are visualized as the “complex plane”
where 𝑎 + 𝑖𝑏 ∈ ℂ is associated with 𝑎, 𝑏 ∈ ℝ2 .
Im 𝑧 𝑦

ℂ ℝ2
𝑎 + 𝑖𝑏 𝑎, 𝑏
𝑏 𝑏

Re 𝑧 𝑥
𝑎 𝑎

During the early decades of the 19th

century, the complex numbers became an
accepted part of mathematics (in large
part due to the development of complex
function theory by Augustin Cauchy).
 William Rowan Hamilton
Sir William Rowan Hamilton (1805-1865) spent the years 1835 to
1843 trying to develop a three dimensional number system based on
triples of real numbers. He never succeeded. However, he did
succeed in developing a four dimensional number system, now called
the quaternions and denoted “ℍ” in his honor.

In a letter he wrote late in his life to

his son Archibald Henry, Hamilton
tells the story of his discovery:
“Every morning in the early part of [October 1843], on my
coming down to breakfast, your little brother, William Edwin,
and yourself, used to ask me, ‘Well, papa, can you multiply
triplets?’ Whereto I was always obliged to reply, with a sad
shake of the head: ‘No, I can only add and subtract them.’ But
on the 16th day of that same month… An electric circuit
seemed to close; and a spark flashed forth the herald (as I
foresaw immediately) of many long years to come of definitely
directed through and work by myself…

So the exact date of the birth of the quaternions

is October 16, 1843.

This quote is based on Unknown Quantity: A Real

and Imaginary History of Algebra by John
Derbyshire, John Henry Press (2006).
… Nor could I resist the impulse-unphilosophical as it may have been-
to cut with a knife on a stone of Brougham Bridge [in Dublin, Ireland;
now called “Broom Bridge”], as we passed it, the fundamental
formula with the symbols 𝑖, 𝑗, 𝑘: 𝑖 2 = 𝑗 2 = 𝑘 2 = 𝑖𝑗𝑘 = −1 which
contains the Solution of the Problem, but, of course, the inscription
has long wince mouldered away.”
 Division Ring
Definition (Hungerford’s III.1.5). A commutative ring 𝑅
with (multiplicative) identity 1𝑅 and no zero divisors is an
integral domain. A ring 𝐷 with identity 1𝐷 ≠ 0 in which
every nonzero element is a unit is a division ring. A field is
a commutative division ring.

Note. In ℍ we have the identity 1 = 1,0,0,0 . Since 𝑖𝑗 =

− 𝑗𝑖 ≠ 𝑖𝑗, then ℍ is not commutative and so ℍ is not an
integral domain nor a field.

Theorem. The quaternions ℍ form a noncommutative

division ring.
 ℍ is a Noncommutative Division Ring
Theorem. The quaternions ℍ form a noncommutative
division ring.
Proof. Extremely tedious computations confirm that multiplication
is associative and that the distribution laws hold. We now show that
every nonzero element of ℍ has a multiplicative inverse. Consider
q = 𝑎0 + 𝑎1 𝑖 + 𝑎2 𝑗 + 𝑎3 𝑘. Define 𝑑 = 𝑎0 2 + 𝑎1 2 + 𝑎2 2 + 𝑎3 2 ≠ 0.
Notice that:

𝑎0 + 𝑎1 𝑖 + 𝑎2 𝑗 + 𝑎3 𝑘 ሺ𝑎0 Τ𝑑) − ሺ𝑎1 Τ𝑑) 𝑖 − ሺ𝑎2 Τ𝑑) 𝑗 − ሺ𝑎3 Τ𝑑)𝑘

= 𝑎0 −𝑎0 /𝑑 − 𝑎1 −𝑎1 Τ𝑑 − 𝑎2 −𝑎2 Τ𝑑 − 𝑎3 −𝑎3 Τ𝑑
+ 𝑎0 −𝑎1 /𝑑 + 𝑎1 𝑎0 Τ𝑑 + 𝑎2 −𝑎3 Τ𝑑 − 𝑎3 −𝑎2 Τ𝑑 𝑖
+ 𝑎0 −𝑎2 /𝑑 + 𝑎2 𝑎0 Τ𝑑 + 𝑎3 −𝑎1 Τ𝑑 − 𝑎1 −𝑎3 Τ𝑑 𝑗
+ 𝑎0 −𝑎3 /𝑑 + 𝑎3 𝑎0 Τ𝑑 + 𝑎1 −𝑎2 Τ𝑑 − 𝑎2 −𝑎1 Τ𝑑 𝑘
= 𝑎0 2 + 𝑎1 2 + 𝑎2 2 + 𝑎3 2 Τ𝑑 = 1.
ℍ is a Noncommutative Division Ring (continued)
Theorem. The quaternions ℍ form a noncommutative
division ring.
Proof (continued). So 𝑞 −1 = 𝑎0 + 𝑎1 𝑖 + 𝑎2 𝑗 + 𝑎3 𝑘 −1 =
𝑎0 Τ𝑑 − 𝑎1 Τ𝑑 𝑖 − 𝑎2 Τ𝑑 𝑗 − 𝑎3 Τ𝑑 𝑘 where 𝑑 = 𝑎0 2 + 𝑎1 2 +
𝑎2 2 + 𝑎3 2 . Therefore every nonzero element of ℍ is a unit and so
the quaternions form a noncommutative division ring. ∎

Note. Since every nonzero element of ℍ is a unit, then ℍ

contains no left zero divisors: If 𝑞1 𝑞2 = 0 and 𝑞1 ≠ 0, then
𝑞2 = 𝑞1 −1 0 = 0. Similarly, ℍ has no right zero divisors.
 The Factor Theorem
The Factor Theorem (Hungerford’s Theorem III.6.6).
Let 𝑅 be a commutative ring with identity and 𝑓 ∈
𝑅[𝑥]. Then 𝑐 ∈ 𝑅 is a root of 𝑓 if and only if 𝑥 − 𝑐
divides 𝑓.

Since ℍ is not commutative,

the Factor Theorem need not
hold there.
 A Bound on the Number of Roots
in an Integral Domain
The Factor Theorem is used to prove the following,
which should remind you of the Fundamental Theorem
of Algebra:

Hungerford’s Theorem III.6.7. If 𝐷 is an integral

domain contained in an integral domain 𝐸 and a 𝑓 ∈
𝐷[𝑥] has degree 𝑛, then 𝑓 has at most 𝑛 distinct roots
in 𝐸.
So far,
so good!
 No Surprise!
So by the previous theorem, in an integral domain an 𝑛
degree polynomial has at most 𝑛 roots. You have
probably dealt with polynomials over fields where there
are not as many roots as the degree of the polynomial.
For example, polynomial 𝑥 2 − 2 does not have any roots
over field ℚ but has two roots over field ℝ. Polynomial
𝑥 3 − 1 has one root over ℝ (and one root over ℚ), but
has three roots over ℂ. But you have probably not
encountered a situation where a polynomial has more
roots than its degree.
I don’t like the
sound of that!
 Surprise!
Example. The polynomial 𝑞2 + 1 ∈ ℍ 𝑞 (we use 𝑞 to
represent a “quaternionic” variable) has more than two
roots. Along with ±𝑖 there are ±𝑗 and ±𝑘. In fact, the
polynomial has an infinite number of roots in ℍ!
Infinite Number of Roots for a Quadratic!
Example. Let 𝑥1 , 𝑥2 , 𝑥3 ∈ ℝ with 𝑥1 2 + 𝑥2 2 + 𝑥3 2 =
1. We have
𝑥1 𝑖 + 𝑥2 𝑗 + 𝑥3 𝑘 2
= 𝑥1 2 𝑖 2 + 𝑥1 𝑥2 𝑖𝑗 + 𝑥1 𝑥3 𝑖𝑘 + 𝑥2 𝑥1 𝑗𝑖 + 𝑥2 2 𝑗 2
+𝑥2 𝑥3 𝑗𝑘 + 𝑥3 𝑥1 𝑘𝑖 + 𝑥3 𝑥2 𝑘𝑗 + 𝑥3 2 𝑘 2
by the definition of multiplication
= − 𝑥1 2 − 𝑥1 2 − 𝑥1 2 since 𝑖𝑗 = −𝑗𝑖,
𝑖𝑘 = −𝑘𝑖, 𝑗𝑘 = −𝑘𝑗, 𝑖 2 = 𝑗 2 = 𝑘 2 = −1
= −1 since 𝑥1 2 + 𝑥2 2 + 𝑥3 2 = 1.
Therefore, 𝑥1 𝑖 + 𝑥2 𝑗 + 𝑥3 𝑘 is a root of 𝑞2 + 1 ∈ ℍ 𝑞 for
all 𝑥1 2 + 𝑥2 2 + 𝑥3 2 = 1 and hence 𝑞2 + 1 has an
infinite number of roots.
 The Factor
Theorem and
Algebraic Closure
in the Quaternions
 Sources

T. Y. Lam, A First Course in G. Gentili and D. C. Struppa, A New

Noncommutative Rings, Graduate Theory of Regular Functions of a
Tests in Mathematics #131, Quaternionic Variable, Advances in
Springer-Verlag (1991). Mathematics 216 (2007), 279-301.
 Two Dimensional Spheres
Definition. Denote by 𝕊 the two dimensional
sphere (as a subset of the four dimensional
quaternions ℍ), 𝕊 =
𝑞 = 𝑥1 𝑖 + 𝑥2 𝑗 + 𝑥3 𝑘 𝑥1 2 + 𝑥2 2 + 𝑥3 2 =1 .
For 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ ℝ we let 𝑥 + 𝑦𝕊 denote the two
dimensional sphere 𝑥 + 𝑦𝕊 = 𝑥 + 𝑦𝐼 𝐼 ∈ 𝕊 .
Note. We have seen that for any 𝐼 ∈ 𝕊 we have
𝐼2 + 1 = 0. We might think of 𝑥 + 𝑦𝕊 as a two
dimensional sphere centered at ሺ𝑥, 0,0,0) with
radius |𝑦|. Spheres play a role in the roots of
quaternionic polynomials.
 Without Commutivity…
If 𝑅 is a ring with identity, then by Hungerford’s
Theorem III.5.2(ii), in the ring of polynomials 𝑅 𝑡
(with 𝑡 as the indeterminate) we have that all 𝑟 ∈ 𝑅
commute with 𝑡 so that σ𝑁 𝑟
𝑛=0 𝑛 𝑡 𝑛
= σ𝑁
𝑛=0 𝑡 𝑛
𝑟𝑛 . But
if 𝑅 is a noncommutative ring (such as ℍ), then there
is ambiguity as to how to define the evaluation
homomorphism.

For example, in ℍ 𝑞 the polynomials 𝑎𝑞 𝑛 and

𝑎0 𝑞𝑎1 𝑞 ⋯ 𝑎𝑛 𝑞, where 𝑎 = 𝑎0 𝑎1 ⋯ 𝑎𝑛 , are the same,
but for 𝑟 ∈ ℍ we may not have that 𝑎𝑟 𝑛 =
𝑎0 𝑟𝑎1 𝑟 ⋯ 𝑟𝑎𝑛 𝑟.
 Quaternionic Polynomials
Definition. We define a left quaternionic polynomial 𝑝 to
be of the form 𝑝 𝑞 = σ𝑁 𝑛=0 𝑞 𝑛 𝑎 . A right quaternionic
𝑛
polynomial 𝑝 to be of the form 𝑝 𝑞 = σ𝑁 𝑎
𝑛=0 𝑛 𝑞 𝑛
.

Note. We now have an unambiguous way to evaluate

left and right quaternionic polynomials. However, they
do not (yet) form a polynomial ring since it is not clear
how to multiply them.
Definition. For two (left) quaternionic polynomials
𝑝1 𝑞 = σ𝑁 𝑛=0 𝑞 𝑛 𝑎 and 𝑝 𝑞 = σ𝑀
𝑛 2 𝑚=0 𝑞 𝑚 𝑏 define the
𝑚
product
(𝑝1 𝑝2 ) 𝑞 = σ𝑛=0,1,…,𝑁;𝑚=0,1,…,𝑀 𝑞𝑛+𝑚 𝑎𝑛 𝑏𝑚 .
 Two Certain Roots Imply Infinite Roots
The following result is originally due to A. Pogorui and M. V.
Shapiro (in “On the Structure of the Set of Zeros of
Quaternionic Polynomials,” Complex Variables 49(6) (2004),
379-389. An easier proof is given in Gentili and Struppa.

Theorem. Let 𝑝 𝑞 = σ𝑁 𝑛=0 𝑞 𝑛 𝑎 be a left quaternionic

𝑛
polynomial. Suppose there exist 𝑥0 , 𝑦0 ∈ ℝ and 𝐼, 𝐽 ∈ 𝕊
with 𝐼 ≠ 𝐽 such that 𝑝 𝑥0 + 𝑦0 𝐼 = 0 and 𝑝 𝑥0 + 𝑦0 𝐽 =
0. Then for all 𝐿 ∈ 𝕊, we have 𝑝 𝑥0 + 𝑦0 𝐿 = 0.
The proof is fairly straightforward and computational. Gentili
and Struppa develop a theory of analytic functions of a
quaternionic variable and show that this theorem holds for
analytic functions.
 Divisors in a Ring

Note. The absence of commutivity in ℍ (and in

rings in general) has an effect on the concept of
a divisor, as we saw foreshadowed when
dealing with divisors of zero.

Definition. Let 𝑅 be a ring. For 𝑟 ∈ 𝑅, if there

are 𝑎, 𝑏 ∈ 𝑅 where 𝑟 = 𝑎𝑏, then 𝑎 is a left
divisor of 𝑟 and 𝑏 is a right divisor of 𝑟.
 A One-Sided Factor Theorem
Definition 16.1 of Lam. Let 𝑅 be a ring and 𝑝 𝑡 =
σ𝑁
𝑛=0 𝑡 𝑛
𝑎𝑛 ∈ 𝑅 𝑡 . An element 𝑟 ∈ 𝑅 is a left root of 𝑝 if
𝑝 𝑞 = σ𝑁 𝑛=0 𝑟 𝑛 𝑎 = 0. A right root is similarly defined.
𝑛

Proposition 16.2 of Lam (The Factor Theorem in a Ring

with Unity).
Let 𝑅 be a ring with unity. An element 𝑟 ∈ 𝑅 is a left root
of nonzero polynomial 𝑝 𝑡 = σ𝑁 𝑛=0 𝑡 𝑛
𝑎𝑛 ∈ 𝑅 𝑡 if and
only if 𝑡 − 𝑟 is a left divisor of 𝑝ሺ𝑡) ∈ 𝑅 𝑡 . The same
holds for right roots and right divisors.
 Algebraic Closure for Fields
Definition (Hungerford’s Section V.3). A field 𝐹 is
algebraically closed if every nonconstant polynomial
𝑝 ∈ 𝐹 𝑥 has a root in 𝐹.
Note. By the Factor Theorem (and induction), a
polynomial of degree 𝑛 in an algebraically closed field
𝐹 can be written as a product of linear terms in 𝐹 𝑥 :
𝑝 𝑥 = σ𝑁 𝑛=0 𝑛𝑎 𝑥 𝑛
= 𝑎 ς 𝑁
𝑁 𝑛=1 𝑥 − 𝑟𝑛 .

FTA: ℂ is algebraically
closed.
 Algebraic Closure for Division Rings
Definition (Lam, page 169). A division ring 𝐷 is left
(right) algebraically closed if every nonconstant
polynomial in 𝐷 𝑡 has a left (right) root in 𝐷.

Note. The following is the Fundamental Theorem of

Algebra for Quaternions. The result originally appeared
in I. Niven’s “Equations in Quaternions,” American
Mathematical Monthly, 48 (1941), 654-661.

Theorem 16.14 of Lam (“Niven-Jacobson” in Lam)

Fundamental Theorem of Algebra for Quaternions.
The quaternions, ℍ, are left (and right) algebraically
closed.
 But, How Many Roots?
Note. The following result is from A. Pogorui and M.
Shapiro’s “On the Structure of the Set of Zeros of
Quaternionic Polynomials,” Complex Variables : Theory and
Applications 49(6) (2004), 379-389.

Theorem (Pogorui and Shapiro). Let 𝑝 be a nonzero

polynomial of degree 𝑛 in ℍ 𝑞 . The set of left (right)
roots of 𝑝 consists of isolated points or isolated two
dimensional spheres of the form 𝑆 = 𝑥 + 𝑦𝕊 for 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ ℝ.
The number of isolated roots plus twice the number of
isolated spheres is less than or equal to 𝑛.
 How Many Roots – The Proof
The Proof of Pogoriu and Shapiro’s Theorem is based on
introducing a polynomial of degree 2𝑛 with real
coefficients (called the “basic polynomial”) which is
associated with a given quaternionic polynomial of
degree 𝑛. A one to one correspondence between the
isolated zeros of the quaternionic polynomial and the
basic polynomial is established, and a one to one
correspondence between the isolated sphere of roots of
the quaternionic polynomial and pairs of complex
conjugate roots of the basic polynomial is established.
Then the fact that a real polynomial of degree 2𝑛 has at
most 2𝑛 complex roots (by the Fundamental Theorem of
Algebra) is used to complete the proof.
What to Make of This… Fundamentally
“My interpretation of this, is that the cleanest place to
address polynomials and algebraic closure is in the complex
field ℂ! The real field ℝ is too small (it doesn’t even have
roots for 𝑥 2 + 1), the quaternions ℍ are too exotic and
weird (𝑥 2 + 1 has infinitely many roots!), but ℂ is just
right!”
 References
1. D.S. Dummit and R.M. Foote’s Abstract Algebra, 3rd Edition,
Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons (2004).
2. J.B. Fraleigh, A First Course in Abstract Algebra, 7th Edition,
Boston: Addison-Wesley (Pearson Education) (2002).
3. G. Gentili and D.C. Struppa, A New Theory of Regular
Functions of a Quaternionic Variable, Advances in
Mathematics 216 (2007), 279-301.
4. T.W. Hungerford, Algebra, NY: Springer-Verlag (1974).
5. T. Y. Lam, A First Course in Noncommutative Rings, Graduate
Tests in Mathematics #131, Springer-Verlag (1991).
6. I. Nivens’ “Equations in Quaternions,” American
Mathematical Monthly, 48 (1941), 654-661.
7. A. Pogorui and M. V. Shapiro, “On the Structure of the Set of
Zeros of Quaternionic Polynomials,” Complex Variables 49(6)
(2004), 379-389.