MHB Could you explain me about 'relation algebraic property with conjugate'?

bw0young0math
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
Hello everyone. At first, I appreciate your click this page.

I have a book named 'A first Course in Abstract Algebra 7th' by Fraleigh.

I have a question about 'relation algebraic property with conjugate' in automorhisms of fields.
in page415,
this book explains "Let E is algebraic extension of F& a,b∈E. Then a and b have the same algebraic property iff irr(a,F)=irr(b,F)."
What's mean algebraic property in that sentense? If you explain me, I will be happy:)Thanks. Have a nice day:)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
bw0young0math said:
Hello everyone. At first, I appreciate your click this page.

I have a book named 'A first Course in Abstract Algebra 7th' by Fraleigh.

I have a question about 'relation algebraic property with conjugate' in automorhisms of fields.
in page415,
this book explains "Let E is algebraic extension of F& a,b∈E. Then a and b have the same algebraic property iff irr(a,F)=irr(b,F)."
What's mean algebraic property in that sentense? If you explain me, I will be happy:)Thanks. Have a nice day:)
I don't have the book. But what Fraleigh is trying to say is the following:

Let $a, b\in K$ be algebraic over $F$ satisfying $irr(a, F)=irr(b, F)$. Then there is a "natural isomorphism" between $F(a)$ and $F(b)$ which is identity on $F$.

The isomorphism is given by $\phi:F(a)\to F(b)$, where $\phi(p(a))=p(b)$ for all $p(x)\in F[x]$.

The fact that $\phi$ is well defined requires $irr(a, F)=irr(b, F)$.
 
caffeinemachine said:
I don't have the book. But what Fraleigh is trying to say is the following:

Let $a, b\in K$ be algebraic over $F$ satisfying $irr(a, F)=irr(b, F)$. Then there is a "natural isomorphism" between $F(a)$ and $F(b)$ which is identity on $F$.

The isomorphism is given by $\phi:F(a)\to F(b)$, where $\phi(p(a))=p(b)$ for all $p(x)\in F[x]$.

The fact that $\phi$ is well defined requires $irr(a, F)=irr(b, F)$.
Thanks! I understand it! F(a)and F(b) are isomorphic so we can think that they have the same algebraic constructure and algebraic properties. Thank you:)
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top