Are Algebraic Extensions Always Finite?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ehrenfest
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fields
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion addresses the nature of algebraic extensions and algebraically closed fields, specifically focusing on whether every algebraic extension is finite. Key points include the clarification that the algebraic closure of the rational numbers, denoted as \(\bar{\mathbb{Q}}\), is not a finite extension of \(\mathbb{Q}\) due to the necessity of adding infinitely many square roots of primes. Additionally, it is established that \(\mathbb{C}\) is algebraically closed in \(\mathbb{C}(x)\), and that a field of characteristic 0 must contain a copy of the rationals. The conversation also emphasizes the importance of understanding the definitions and properties of algebraic closures and extensions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of algebraic extensions and their properties
  • Familiarity with the concept of algebraically closed fields
  • Knowledge of polynomial rings and rational functions
  • Basic understanding of field characteristics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of algebraic closures, specifically for fields like \(\mathbb{Q}\) and \(\mathbb{Z}/p\mathbb{Z}\)
  • Learn about the structure of finite extensions and their implications in field theory
  • Explore the concept of transcendental elements in field extensions
  • Investigate the implications of Eisenstein's criterion in determining irreducibility of polynomials
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, particularly those specializing in abstract algebra, field theory, and anyone studying the properties of algebraic extensions and algebraically closed fields.

  • #31
Hurkyl said:
How? Can you come up with an example?

The dot notation is definitely not always compatible with field notation, as I will show. Consider the field Z/3Z. Writing 5*2 is absurd because 5 is not an element of the field Z/3Z. You need to write 5 \cdot 2 if you want to represent the sum 2+2+2+2+2.

morphism, if you are saying that if F is a field that contains f, then n \cdot f = nf WHEN the characteristic of F is greater than n or equal to 0, then I think that is true.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
ehrenfest said:
Writing 5*2 is absurd because 5 is not an element of the field Z/3Z.[/itex]
Er, yes it is. 5 denotes the same element that 2 does.
 
  • #33
OK. This is getting really technical. I would rather move on.
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K