Field Extensions and Root Fields

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the proposition that every extension of degree 2 is a root field, with an initial proof attempt that faced criticism for assuming the existence of a polynomial with roots in the extension. Participants emphasize the need to establish that the polynomial's coefficients belong to the base field F, highlighting a specific example involving complex numbers. The conversation also touches on terminology, noting that "root fields" are often referred to as "splitting fields" in ring theory. The importance of correctly defining a root field and ensuring all assumptions are justified is underscored. Overall, the thread illustrates the nuances of field extensions and the requirements for proving them as root fields.
jmjlt88
Messages
94
Reaction score
0
I have a quick question. How does the following look?


Proposition:

Every extension of degree 2 is a root field.

Proof:

Let F be a field. Let p(x) ε F[x] and suppose p(x) has degree n. Then p(x) has n roots, say c1,c2,...,cn. Let E be the extension of F that contains the aforementioned roots, and suppose [E:F]=2. Now, we know F(c1,c2,...,cn) is the root field of p(x) over F. Previously, we have shown that if an extension over a field is of a degree that is prime, then there is no proper field between the field and its extension*. The extension E clearly contains F, and by our hypothesis c1,c2,...,cnε E. Thus, F(c1,c2,...,cn) is subset of E. Then since,
F(c1,c2,...,cn) ≠ F, F(c1,c2,...,cn) = E. Hence, our extension is indeed a root field. QED


*I simply used the theorem that is analogous to LaGrange's Theorem for Finite Groups, but for fields!

Now, this is my "second version" of the proof. I am going back and trying to prove a few exercises different way. I am not sure if I set up my assumptions correctly. Any criticism would be very helpful! Thanks! :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, that's not correct.

Here, you basically assume the existence of a polynomial whose roots are in E. You can't do that.

What you have to do is assume that [E:F]=2 and actually prove that there's a polynomial whose roots are in E and that make E into a root field.
 
I knew something was dodgy about my assumptions. I just took another look at it. Here is an outline of how I want to prove it. (Before I write up the proof nicely, I usually write my solution line by line to make sure I have not made any unjustified statement.)

Every extension of degree 2 is a root field.

Proof: Let F be a field, and let E be an extension such that [E:F]=2.

1. Let {a,b} be our basis for E.

2. By defintion of a basis, every element of E can be written as a linear combination of {a,b} with coefficients in F.

3. Then F(a,b) is clearly a subset of E. But, if we let x ε E, then x is some linear combination of {a,b}. Hence, x ε F(a,b). [This statement may not be needed]

4. Thus, E=F(a,b)

5. Since E is a finite extention, every element in E is algebraic over F.

6. Let p(x) be the polynomial who roots are a, b. (i.e. p(x)=(x-a)(x-b))

7. Then, E is a root field for p(x) over F.

QED

Thank you for all the help! :)
 
jmjlt88 said:
6. Let p(x) be the polynomial who roots are a, b. (i.e. p(x)=(x-a)(x-b))

OK, but that's not good enough. You want the coefficient of p(x) to be elements of F. This is not always the case.

For example, [\mathbb{C},\mathbb{R}]=2. We can take a=i and b=1. Then p(x)=(x-1)(x-i)=x^2-(1+i)x+i does not have its coefficients in \mathbb{R}.
 
Hmmm...That's right.. (x-a)(x-b)ε E[x]. Just how (x+i)(x-i)ε C[x].

Maybe I said too much in Line 6. Would be suffice to just say that p(x) ε F[x] whose roots are a and b is the polynomial that E is the root field for over F?
 
jmjlt88 said:
Hmmm...That's right.. (x-a)(x-b)ε E[x]. Just how (x+i)(x-i)ε C[x].

Maybe I said too much in Line 6. Would be suffice to just say that p(x) ε F[x] whose roots are a and b is the polynomial that E is the root field for over F?

You have to check your definition of root field. I guess that a root field that is spanned by the roots of a polynomial whose coefficients are in F. So I think you do need to find a polynomial with coefficients in F.

You're right that for [\mathbb{C}:\mathbb{R}], that you have to take (x+i)(x-i). Can you generalize this?
 
I had never heard of a root field until I read this post. When I learned ring theory, we referred to them as splitting fields :approve:

...I miss algebra.
 
christoff said:
I had never heard of a root field until I read this post. When I learned ring theory, we referred to them as splitting fields :approve:

Yeah, we used the term splitting field as well.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K