Is \( \mathbb{Q} \subseteq L \subseteq \mathbb{Q}(c) \) a Galois Extension?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PsychonautQQ
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Extension
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around whether the field extension \( \mathbb{Q} \subseteq L \subseteq \mathbb{Q}(c) \), where \( c \) is a primitive \( n \)th root of unity, is a Galois extension. Participants are examining the properties of the minimal polynomial of elements in \( L \) and the implications for the Galois group associated with the extension.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Some participants attempt to analyze the minimal polynomial of \( d \), questioning whether it can have roots outside of powers of \( d \). Others explore the conditions under which \( \mathbb{Q}(d) \) might be a Galois extension, considering the definitions of normal and separable extensions.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants raising questions about the nature of the minimal polynomial and its roots. There is an exploration of the implications of these properties for the Galois extension status of \( L \). Some guidance is offered regarding the definitions and properties relevant to the discussion, but no consensus has been reached.

Contextual Notes

Participants note potential confusion regarding the notation used for \( d \) and its degree, as well as the relationship between the minimal polynomial and the polynomial \( x^d - 1 \). There is also mention of the need for clarity on the assumptions made about the structure of the extension.

PsychonautQQ
Messages
781
Reaction score
10

Homework Statement


Let Q < L < Q(c) where c is a primitive nth root of unity over Q. Is [L:Q] a Galois extension?

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


L must be equal to Q(d) where d is a non primitive nth root of unity. [Q(d):Q] is not a galois extension because the minimal polynomial of d over Q is x^d -1, and this polynomial has d roots, not all of which are in Q. Is this correct?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What does it mean for ##\mathbb{Q}\subsetneq \mathbb{Q}(d)## to be a Galois extension? Can the minimal polynomial of ##d## have other roots than powers of ##d##? By the way ##x^d-1## is not the minimal polynomial, but only a factor of this: ##x-1## divides ##x^d-1## and the result is still in ##\mathbb{Q}[x]##. So why should we call such a polynomial minimal though?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PsychonautQQ
fresh_42 said:
What does it mean for ##\mathbb{Q}\subsetneq \mathbb{Q}(d)## to be a Galois extension? Can the minimal polynomial of ##d## have other roots than powers of ##d##? By the way ##x^d-1## is not the minimal polynomial, but only a factor of this: ##x-1## divides ##x^d-1## and the result is still in ##\mathbb{Q}[x]##. So why should we call such a polynomial minimal though?
Q<Q(d) is a galois extension if Q(d) is a finite normal and separable extension. We know it is separable because Char(Q)=0. If Q(d) is a finite and normal extension then it is a splitting field for the minimal polynomial of d in Q. The minimal polynomial of d will be a factor of x^d-1, but I'm not sure if the roots of it's minimal polynomial are all powers of d; if they are, then I suspect this is a Galois extension.
 
PsychonautQQ said:
Q<Q(d) is a galois extension if Q(d) is a finite normal and separable extension. We know it is separable because Char(Q)=0. If Q(d) is a finite and normal extension then it is a splitting field for the minimal polynomial of d in Q. The minimal polynomial of d will be a factor of x^d-1, but I'm not sure if the roots of it's minimal polynomial are all powers of d; if they are, then I suspect this is a Galois extension.
You don't need the powers. Only the definition of normal. Firstly, how did you find ##d##? And why has it to be of the claimed form, i.e. its minimal polynomial a divisor of ##(x^d-1)##? Btw, it's a bit confusing to denote the element by ##d## as well as the degree of ##x^d-1##. One is a complex and one a natural number. And then, does this situation differ at any point from the one you started at?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PsychonautQQ
fresh_42 said:
You don't need the powers. Only the definition of normal. Firstly, how did you find ##d##? And why has it to be of the claimed form, i.e. its minimal polynomial a divisor of ##(x^d-1)##? Btw, it's a bit confusing to denote the element by ##d## as well as the degree of ##x^d-1##. One is a complex and one a natural number. And then, does this situation differ at any point from the one you started at?

my bad, I'm more lost than I thought I suppose. I was thinking something like if the degree of d is n then the minimal polynomial of d will be a divisor of x^n-1. Am I way off track here?
 
PsychonautQQ said:
my bad, I'm more lost than I thought I suppose. I was thinking something like if the degree of d is n then the minimal polynomial of d will be a divisor of x^n-1. Am I way off track here?
You should proceed step by step.

What we have is ##\mathbb{Q} \subseteq \mathbb{Q}(c)## with a primitive ##h-##th root of unity, i.e. ##c^h=1##. (I choose ##h## because you burnt ##n## in your question.) Let us define the minimal polynomial of ##c## by ##m_c(x)##. Then ##m_c(x)\,\vert \,(x^h-1)## and ##m_c(x)## is the product of all ##(x-c^k)## with ##(k,h)=1## being coprime. The Galois group of ##\mathbb{Q}(c)## over ##\mathbb{Q}## is isomorphic to the cyclic group ##\mathbb{Z}_h^* = \mathbb{Z}_{\varphi(h)}##.

Now we assume a field ##\mathbb{Q} \subseteq L \subseteq \mathbb{Q}(c)## and we know, that its Galois group is a cyclic subgroup ##\mathbb{Z}_n## of ##\mathbb{Z}_{\varphi(h)}##, i.e. ##n\cdot m = \varphi(h)## for some ##m##. We may further assume that ##\mathbb{Z}_n## is generated by a (single) automorphism of order ##n##, which is also an automorphism ##\sigma## of ##\mathbb{Q}(c)## and therefore ##\sigma^{\varphi(h)}=(\sigma^m)^n = 1##. So ##\mathbb{Z}_n=\{\sigma^m,\sigma^{2m},\ldots,\sigma^{(n-1)m},\sigma^{nm}=1\}## is the Galois group of ##L##. This means in return that ##L## consists of all elements ##a##, that can be substituted by ##\sigma^{m}(a)##.

This is what we know from the given situation. And it might be helpful to have examples like ##h=12, 16## or ##24## in mind. Now from here we can either list all elements ##a \in L## given a basis of ##\mathbb{Q}(c)## over ##\mathbb{Q}##, i.e. powers of ##c##, or construct a primitive element ##d## (and show that ##L=\mathbb{Q}(d)##).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K