MHB Basic Theory of Field Extensions - Exercise from D&F ....

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading Dummit and Foote, Chapter 13 - Field Theory.

I am currently studying Section 13.1 : Basic Theory of Field Extensions

I need some help with an aspect of Exercise 1 of Section 13.1 ... ...

Exercise 1 reads as follows:
View attachment 6597
My attempt at a solution is as follows:$$p(x) = x^3 + 9x + 6$$ is irreducible by Eisenstein ... ...Now consider $$(x^3 + 9x + 10) = (x + 1) ( x^2 - x + 10) $$
and note that $$(x^3 + 9x + 10) = (x^2 + 9x + 6) + 4$$ ... ...

Now $$\theta$$ is a root of $$(x^3 + 9x + 6)$$ so that ...$$( \theta + 1) ( \theta^2 - \theta +10) = ( \theta^3 + 9 \theta + 6) + 4 = 0 +4 = 4 $$Thus $$( \theta + 1)^{-1} = \frac{ ( \theta^2 - \theta +10) }{4}$$ ... ...Is that correct?

... BUT ... if it is correct I am most unsure of exactly where in the calculation we depend on $$p(x)$$ being irreducible ...Can someone please explain where exactly in the above calculation we depend on $$p(x)$$ being irreducible?Note that I am vaguely aware that we are calculating in $$\mathbb{Q} ( \theta )$$ ... which is isomorphic to $$\mathbb{Q} [x] / ( p(x) )$$ ... if $$p(x)$$ is irreducible ...
... BUT ...I cannot specify the exact point(s) in the above calculation above where the calculation would break down if $$p(x)$$ was not irreducible ... .. in fact, I cannot specify any specific points where the calculation would break down ... so I am not understanding the connection of the theory to this exercise ... ...
Can someone please help to clarify this issue ... ...Peter
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Peter,

Your answer is correct. The irreducibility of $p$ ensures that $\Bbb Q(\theta) \neq \Bbb Q$. The inverse you found lies in $\Bbb Q(\theta)$, not $\Bbb Q$.
 
Euge said:
Hi Peter,

Your answer is correct. The irreducibility of $p$ ensures that $\Bbb Q(\theta) \neq \Bbb Q$. The inverse you found lies in $\Bbb Q(\theta)$, not $\Bbb Q$.
Thanks Euge ... appreciate the help ...

Peter
 
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
When decomposing a representation ##\rho## of a finite group ##G## into irreducible representations, we can find the number of times the representation contains a particular irrep ##\rho_0## through the character inner product $$ \langle \chi, \chi_0\rangle = \frac{1}{|G|} \sum_{g\in G} \chi(g) \chi_0(g)^*$$ where ##\chi## and ##\chi_0## are the characters of ##\rho## and ##\rho_0##, respectively. Since all group elements in the same conjugacy class have the same characters, this may be...
Back
Top