I'm sure whoever is familiar with this subject has already seen this several times. I've seen it several times myself, and I even remember proving it in detail a couple of years ago, but now I'm stuck.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

I'm quoting what my professor did in class.

Given some separable extension L/K, say for simplicity char(K)=0 and forget separability issues, we know that there are exactly n=[L:K] K embeddings of L into some algebraic closure C of L. For a in L we define its trace and norm (with respect to the extension L/K) respectively as the sum and the product of the n embeddings' actions on a.

All good.

Now the proposition that's bugging me is the following one: had we defined a linear operator on L by T_a(x)=ax, then the trace and the norm of a are exactly that trace and determinant of T_a.

I'm trying to show that the characteristic polynomial of T_a is exactly (x-a_1)...(x-a_n), where a_1,...,a_n are the images of a under the K embeddings of L into C. While this is a very nice idea, I'm failing miserably.

Help?

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Field trace and norm (Equivalence between definitions)

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**