MHB Field Theory - Nicholson - Algebraic Extensions - Section 6.2 - Example 13

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
xample 13 from Nicholson: Introduction to Abstract Algebra, Section 6.2, page 282 reads as follows: (see attachment)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Example 13: If u = \sqrt[3]{2} show that \mathbb{Q}(u) = \mathbb{Q}(u)^2

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The solution comes down to the following:

Given \mathbb{Q}(u) \supseteq \mathbb{Q}(u)^2 \supseteq \mathbb{Q}

so [ \mathbb{Q}(u) \ : \ \mathbb{Q}] = [ \mathbb{Q}(u) \ : \ \mathbb{Q}(u)^2] \ [ \mathbb{Q}(u)^2 \ : \ \mathbb{Q} ]

Now Nicholson shows that [ \mathbb{Q}(u) \ : \ \mathbb{Q}] = 3 and [ \mathbb{Q}(u)^2 \ : \ \mathbb{Q} ] = 3

so [ \mathbb{Q}(u) \ : \ \mathbb{Q}(u)^2] = 1

Then Nicholson (I think) concludes that \mathbb{Q}(u) = \mathbb{Q}(u)^2

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My problem is as follows:

How (exactly) does it follow that:

[ \mathbb{Q}(u) \ : \ \mathbb{Q}(u)^2] = 1 \Longrightarrow \mathbb{Q}(u) = \mathbb{Q}(u)^2

Can someone help?

Peter
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Peter said:
xample 13 from Nicholson: Introduction to Abstract Algebra, Section 6.2, page 282 reads as follows: (see attachment)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Example 13: If u = \sqrt[3]{2} show that \mathbb{Q}(u) = \mathbb{Q}(u)^2

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The solution comes down to the following:

Given \mathbb{Q}(u) \supseteq \mathbb{Q}(u)^2 \supseteq \mathbb{Q}

so [ \mathbb{Q}(u) \ : \ \mathbb{Q}] = [ \mathbb{Q}(u) \ : \ \mathbb{Q}(u)^2] \ [ \mathbb{Q}(u)^2 \ : \ \mathbb{Q} ]

Now Nicholson shows that [ \mathbb{Q}(u) \ : \ \mathbb{Q}] = 3 and [ \mathbb{Q}(u)^2 \ : \ \mathbb{Q} ] = 3

so [ \mathbb{Q}(u) \ : \ \mathbb{Q}(u)^2] = 1

Then Nicholson (I think) concludes that \mathbb{Q}(u) = \mathbb{Q}(u)^2

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My problem is as follows:

How (exactly) does it follow that:

[ \mathbb{Q}(u) \ : \ \mathbb{Q}(u)^2] = 1 \Longrightarrow \mathbb{Q}(u) = \mathbb{Q}(u)^2

Can someone help?

Peter
I'd like to point put that the notation you are using is incorrect (or at least not standard). You write $\mathbb Q(u)^2$. I think you mean $\mathbb Q(u^2)$.

Now. We prove the following general fact.

Let $E$ be an extension of a field $F$ with $[E:F]=1$. Then $E=F$.

Proof: Suppose not. Then there is an element $a \in E\setminus F$. Clearly $a$ is algebraic over $F$. But since $[E:F(a)][F(a):F]=[E:F]=1$, we must have $[F(a):F]=1$. This forces $a\in F$ (as discussed in one of your previous threads). Thus we arrive at a contradiction. Thus $E=F$.

From here it is easy to see that $[\mathbb Q(u):\mathbb Q(u^2)]=1$ gives $\mathbb Q(u)=\mathbb Q(u^2)$ by putting $E=\mathbb Q(u)$ and $F=\mathbb Q(u^2)$ in the above claim.
 
caffeinemachine said:
I'd like to point put that the notation you are using is incorrect (or at least not standard). You write $\mathbb Q(u)^2$. I think you mean $\mathbb Q(u^2)$.

Now. We prove the following general fact.

Let $E$ be an extension of a field $F$ with $[E:F]=1$. Then $E=F$.

Proof: Suppose not. Then there is an element $a \in E\setminus F$. Clearly $a$ is algebraic over $F$. But since $[E:F(a)][F(a):F]=[E:F]=1$, we must have $[F(a):F]=1$. This forces $a\in F$ (as discussed in one of your previous threads). Thus we arrive at a contradiction. Thus $E=F$.

From here it is easy to see that $[\mathbb Q(u):\mathbb Q(u^2)]=1$ gives $\mathbb Q(u)=\mathbb Q(u^2)$ by putting $E=\mathbb Q(u)$ and $F=\mathbb Q(u^2)$ in the above claim.

Thanks caffeinemachine.

Yes, notation was wrong ... Was a typo, but you are correct to point it out!

Peter
 
Another approach:

Suppose $[E:F] = 1$ with $E$ algebraic over $F$, and assume $a \in E\setminus F$.

Then $a$ satisfies a polynomial of degree 1 in $F[x]$, say:

$f(x) = c_0 + c_1x$, where $c_1 \neq 0$.

Thus $c_0 + c_1a = 0$ so that: $a = -\dfrac{c_0}{c_1} \in F$, contradiction.

Thus $E = F$.

Yet another way to see this:

If $[E:F] = 1$, then $E$ as a vector space over $F$ has dimension 1. Since $1 \neq 0$ in $F$, we see that $\{1\}$ is a basis for $E$ over $F$, and hence any element $a \in E$ is of the form:

$a = c_0(1) = c_0$ for some $c_0 \in F$, that is: $E \subseteq F$, and since $F \subseteq E$ is trivial, we must have $E = F$.
 
Deveno said:
Another approach:

Suppose $[E:F] = 1$ with $E$ algebraic over $F$, and assume $a \in E\setminus F$.

Then $a$ satisfies a polynomial of degree 1 in $F[x]$, say:

$f(x) = c_0 + c_1x$, where $c_1 \neq 0$.

Thus $c_0 + c_1a = 0$ so that: $a = -\dfrac{c_0}{c_1} \in F$, contradiction.

Thus $E = F$.

Yet another way to see this:

If $[E:F] = 1$, then $E$ as a vector space over $F$ has dimension 1. Since $1 \neq 0$ in $F$, we see that $\{1\}$ is a basis for $E$ over $F$, and hence any element $a \in E$ is of the form:

$a = c_0(1) = c_0$ for some $c_0 \in F$, that is: $E \subseteq F$, and since $F \subseteq E$ is trivial, we must have $E = F$.
Thanks Deveno. Appreciate your help.

Peter
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
792
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
21
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K