Group Theory-solution to polynomial equations

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Himanshu
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Group Polynomial
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion focuses on the role of Group Theory in solving polynomial equations of degree five or greater, particularly referencing Galois' contributions and the implications of solvability in algebraic terms. Participants explore foundational concepts in abstract algebra, field extensions, and the nature of Galois groups.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant inquires how Group Theory aids in finding solutions to polynomial equations of degree five or greater and requests a formal explanation of Galois' proof regarding their unsolvability.
  • Another participant questions the seriousness of the inquiry and suggests that a background in abstract algebra, including concepts like field extensions and normal subgroups, is necessary to engage with the topic effectively.
  • A participant shares their background in group theory and mentions their exposure to Galois' work, suggesting that Galois initially used a nascent form of Group Theory to address polynomial equations.
  • A detailed explanation is provided about field extensions, defining Q(p) for polynomials and discussing the nature of solutions, including the necessity of including complex numbers and roots of unity.
  • Clarifications are made regarding the definition of solvability by radicals and the relationship between Galois groups and polynomial solvability, emphasizing that a polynomial's Galois group being solvable is a key criterion for its solvability by radicals.
  • A participant expresses confusion about the definitions and implications of field extensions and automorphisms, questioning the consistency of the explanations provided.
  • Further inquiries are raised about the possibility of defining fields that include imaginary numbers or other algebraic structures, suggesting that the discussion might be limited to rational numbers in certain contexts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit a mix of understanding and confusion regarding the foundational concepts of Group Theory and its application to polynomial equations. There is no consensus on the clarity of the explanations provided, and some participants express conflicting interpretations of the definitions discussed.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the potential misunderstanding of automorphisms and field definitions, as well as the scope of the discussion being primarily focused on rational numbers without fully addressing the implications of including complex or other number systems.

Himanshu
Messages
67
Reaction score
0
How does Group Theory help to find the solutions of the polynomial equations of degree five or greater. How did Galios proved that polynomial equations of degree five or greater can't be solved in an algebraic way. A formal answer would be helpful.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's hard to believe you are serious! There are whole books and whole semester courses devoted to that topic. How much abstract algebra have you had? Do you know what a "field extension" is? Do you know what a "normal subgroup" is? I would consider those pre-requisites.
 
I know the basics of group theory. I know what is a group, a subgroup, rings though I have not explored too much of it, multiplication table, a dihedral group, normal subgroup, a little bit of representation theory, and its application in the quark model. I studied all these in "Classical Mechanics" by-Herbert Goldstein. Group theory is added as an appendix to this book. I haven't studied much of abstract algebra in a mathematics book.

I have also read about Evastre Galios that had invented Group Theory to find the solutions of the polynomial equations of degree five or greater. Therefore I assume that he used the 'infant' Group theory to solve his problems. Later it was extended by Lie, and was realized that Group Theory is an important tool for Physics.
 
Very good. (It is "Galois", by the way, not "Galios".) There is simply not room here (and this isn't even a "margin") to go into it in depth, but here is a very general, very rough, outline. You start with "field extensions". Given a number, r, Q(r) is defined as the 'smallest field containing all rational numbers (Q) and the number r. For example, if r= [itex]\sqrt{3}[/itex], one can show that Q([itex]\sqrt{3}[/itex]) consists of all number of the form a+ b[itex]\sqrt{3}[/itex], where a and b are rational numbers. If r= [itex]^3\sqrt{2}[/itex], one can show that Q([itex]^3\sqrt{2}[/itex]) consists of all numbers of the form a+ b[itex]^3\sqrt{2}[/itex]+ c[itex]^3\sqrt{4}[/itex] where a, b, c are rational numbers. Given several numbers, r1, r2, etc, the we define Q(r1, r2, ...) in the obvious way: the smallest field containing all rationa numbers and each of those numbers.

Given a polynomial, p(x), with integer coefficients, we can define Q(p) as "the smallest field containg all rational numbers and all solutions to p(x)= 0. If p(x)= x2- 3, then Q(p) is exactly the same as Q([itex]\sqrt{3}[/itex]), all numbers of the form a+ b[itex]\sqrt{3}[/itex]. However, if p(x)= x3- 2, Q(p) is not the same as Q([itex]^3\sqrt{2}[/itex]) since that contains only real numbers and p(x)= x3- 2= 0 has complex number solutions. We have to include [itex]\omega_3[/itex], the "principal third root of unity".

That leads to a precise definition of what we mean when we say we can have a formula for a polynomial equation:
A polynomial is said to be "solvable by roots" if and only if there exist a finite sequence of numbers, x1[/sup], x2, ..., xn, together with a corresponding sequence of positive integers, k1, k2, ..., kn, such that:
Q(p) is a subfield of Q(x1, x2,... , xn) (Typically, you can take the x's to be the solutions to p(x)= 0 and Q(p) is equal to that, but it is not necessary) and
For each i, either
1) xiki is contained in Q(x1[/sup, ...,xi-1[/itex] or
2) xi= [itex]\omega[/itex]ki
Do you see what that means? Each x is either a complex "root of unity" or it is a root of a number which is a root,...

Once you have that, you can look at automorphisms on those fields. That is, isomorphisms from the field to itself. Since the automorphism are from one field to another, we can "chain" them- define an operation, o, by f o g= f(g(x)). Of course, the identity function e(x)= x is an automorphism and acts as an identity under "composition". Also, since each function is an isomorphism, it has an inverse. The set of all automorphisms on a field is a group with composition as the operation. Given a field extension of the rational numbers, that is, a field F which contains Q, the "Galois group" of F, G(F), is defined as the set of all automorphisms on F that "fix" members of Q: if r is in Q, then f(r)= r. Clearly the identity function is in that set and so is the inverse of any such functions: G(F) is a subgroup of the group of automorphisms on F. If p(x) is a polynomial with integer coefficients, Q(p) is such a field and G(Q(p)) is the "Galois group of p(x)", called G(p).

Since any field containing the rational numbers must have an infinite number of members, you might think those "Galois groups" would be infinite. That is not in general true. Take p(x)= x2- 3. We have already seen that any member of Q(p) can be written as [itex]a+ b\sqrt{3}[/itex]. Apply a function, f, of G(p), to such a number: Since f is an isomorphism, f([itex]a+ b\sqrt{3}[/itex])= [itex]f(a)+ f(b)f(\sqrt{3})[/itex]. Since f 'fixes' rational numbers, that is [itex]a+ bf(\sqrt{3})[/itex]. Can [itex]f(\sqrt{3})[/itex] be anything?

No, [itex]\sqrt{3}[/itex] satisfies [itex](\sqrt{3})^2= 3[/itex]. f([itex]\sqrt{3}^2[/itex])= (f([itex]\sqrt{3})^2= f(3)= 3. That is, f([itex]\sqrt{3}[/itex]) must satisfy the same equation. There are only two such numbers, [itex]\sqrt{3}[/itex], and [itex]-\sqrt{3}[/itex]. If e([itex]\sqrt{3}[/itex])= [itex]\sqrt{3}[/itex], then e(a+ b[itex]\sqrt{3}[/itex])= a+ be([itex]\sqrt{3}[/itex])= a+ b[itex]\sqrt{3}[/itex], the identity function. If f([itex]\sqrt{3}[/itex])= [itex]-\sqrt{3}[/itex], then f(a+ b[itex]\sqrt{3}[/itex])= a- b[itex]\sqrt{3}[/itex] and fof= e. With p(x)= x<sup>2</sup>- 3, G(p) is the group with 2 elements.<br /> <br /> Essentially, for any polynomial p, functions in G(p) <b>permute</b> solutions to p(x)= 0. What Galois did was not develop all of Group theory but show, and use, the properties of groups of permutations (without using the word "group" of course). All of Group theory has arisen from that.<br /> <br /> Now, another definition: A group, G, is called "solvable" if and only if there exist a finite sequence of groups, G<sub>0</sub>, G<sub>1</sub>, ..., G<sub>n</sub>, such that G<sub>0</sub> is the "trivial" group containing only the identity, G<sub>n</sub>= G and, for all i> 0, G<sub>i-1</sub> is a <b>normal</b> subgroup of G and the quotient group, G<sub>i</sub>/G<sub>i-1</sub> is a commutative group. <br /> <br /> Notice how the "extension fields" in the definition of "solvable by radicals" matches up with the subgroups. The main theorem, which I can surely not give here, is "A polynomial, p(x), with integer coefficients, is 'solvable by radicals' if and only if its Galois group, G(p), is a 'solvable group' ".<br /> <br /> The fact that there cannot be a "formula" for solving all polynomials of a degree greater than or equal to 5" follows from a few more facts:<br /> 1. Given any positive integer, n, there exist a polynomial, of degree n, whose Galois group is the symmetric group S<sub>n</sub>.<br /> 2. If n is greater than or equal to 5, S<sub>n</sub> is NOT a solvable group.<br /> <br /> One relatively elementary textbook that goes into this is "Abstract Algebra a concrete introduction" by Robert Redfield, published by Addison Wesley Longman[/itex]
 
Thank you very much for that help. It took me some time to read and understand. I have few questions.

However, if p(x)= x3- 2, Q(p) is not the same as Q([tex]\sqrt[3]{2}[/tex]) since that contains only real numbers and p(x)= x3- 2= 0 has complex number solutions. We have to include , the "principal third root of unity".

Can't we have a field that contains imaginary numbers or quaternions or octonions. Or is it that in the above case the field is defined only for rational numbers. I guess if the field would be defined for imaginary numbers too then Q(p) must be same as Q([tex]\sqrt[3]{2}[/tex]).

Once you have that, you can look at automorphisms on those fields. That is, isomorphisms from the field to itself. Since the automorphism are from one field to another, we can "chain" them- define an operation, o, by f o g= f(g(x)).

It seems I find those sentences conflicting. An automorphism is an isomorphism from a mathematical object to itself. But the third sentence "Since the automorphism are from one field to another..." is conflicting the second

Since any field containing the rational numbers must have an infinite number of members, you might think those "Galois groups" would be infinite. That is not in general true. Take p(x)= x2- 3. We have already seen that any member of Q(p) can be written as . Apply a function, f, of G(p), to such a number: Since f is an isomorphism, f()= . Since f 'fixes' rational numbers, that is . Can be anything?

That was an interesting point. At first I really thought that a "Galois group" would be infinite. The above point elucidates it.

Essentially, for any polynomial p, functions in G(p) permute solutions to p(x)= 0. What Galois did was not develop all of Group theory but show, and use, the properties of groups of permutations (without using the word "group" of course). All of Group theory has arisen from that.

Yes I thought that must be true. How could Galois develop all of Group theory as a teenager!
 
Last edited:
since roots of complex numbers form a cyclic pattern, if all roots of an equation can be obtained from the coefficient field by successively adjoining roots, then the structure of the field containing the roots has a symmetry which decomposes into cyclic structures.

i.e. the "automorphism group", or symmetry group, of the root field , has a tower of relatively normal subgroups, with cyclic quotients.galois was strong and insightful, and he read the works of the masters who came before him.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K