MHB Show That F[u]=F(u): Proving with Theorem

  • Thread starter Thread starter mathmari
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around proving that F[u] equals F(u) under the conditions of a given theorem about fields and irreducible polynomials. It establishes that F[u] consists of polynomials in u with coefficients from F, while F(u) includes rational functions formed by these polynomials. The argument demonstrates that F[u] is a subset of F(u) since any polynomial can be expressed as a fraction with a denominator of 1. Additionally, since K = F[u] is a field, every non-zero element has an inverse, confirming that F(u) is also a subset of F[u]. Ultimately, this leads to the conclusion that F[u] equals F(u), affirming the correctness of the proof.
mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,984
Reaction score
7
Hey! :o

We have the following theorem:
Let $F$ be a field and $p(x)\in F[x]$ irreducible. Then there is a field $K$, of which $F$ is a subfield with the following properties:
  1. $\exists u\in K$ with $p(u)=0$, i.e., $p$ has a root in $K$.
  2. $K=F$


Referring to this theorem, I want to show that $F=F(u)$.

The elements of $F(u)$ are of the form $\frac{f(u)}{g(u)}$, where $f(u), g(u)\in F$ and $g(u)\neq 0$.
The elements of $F$ are the polynomials of $u$ with coefficients in $F$.
So, we have that $F\subseteq F(u)$ for $g(u)=1$, right?

At the theorem we have that $K=F$ is a field, that means that each non-zero element has an inverse. Therefore, $\forall f(u)\in F \ \ \exists g(u)\in F : \frac{f(u)}{g(u)}\in F \Rightarrow F(u)\subseteq F$.

So, we conclude that $F=F(u)$.

Is everything correct? Could I improve something? (Wondering)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
mathmari said:
Hey! :o

We have the following theorem:
Let $F$ be a field and $p(x)\in F[x]$ irreducible. Then there is a field $K$, of which $F$ is a subfield with the following properties:
  1. $\exists u\in K$ with $p(u)=0$, i.e., $p$ has a root in $K$.
  2. $K=F$


Referring to this theorem, I want to show that $F=F(u)$.

The elements of $F(u)$ are of the form $\frac{f(u)}{g(u)}$, where $f(u), g(u)\in F$ and $g(u)\neq 0$.
The elements of $F$ are the polynomials of $u$ with coefficients in $F$.

The elements of $F$ are the polynomials in $F[x]$ evaluated at $u$.

So, we have that $F\subseteq F(u)$ for $g(u)=1$, right?

At the theorem we have that $K=F$ is a field, that means that each non-zero element has an inverse. Therefore, $\forall f(u)\in F \ \ \exists g(u)\in F : \frac{f(u)}{g(u)}\in F \Rightarrow F(u)\subseteq F$.

Saying that each nonzero element of $F$ is invertible in $F$ is not the same as what you have written. It means that
$$\forall f(u)\in F, \exists g(u)\in F \text{ such that } f(u)g(u)=1$$
This helps because it tells us that whenever $g(u)\in F$ is nonzero, we have $1/g(u)\in F$. Therefore $f(u)/g(u)\in F$ for all $f(u)\in F$ and all nonzero $g(u)\in F$, showing that $F(u)\subseteq F$.

So, we conclude that $F=F(u)$.

Is everything correct? Could I improve something? (Wondering)


I have added my comments in red in the above.
 
caffeinemachine said:
I have added my comments in red in the above.

Let $F$ be a field and $p(x)\in F[x]$ irreducible. Then there is a field $K$, of which $F$ is a subfield with the following properties:
  1. $\exists u\in K$ with $p(u)=0$, i.e., $p$ has a root in $K$.
  2. $K=F$
The elements of $F(u)$ are of the form $\frac{f(u)}{g(u)}$, where $f(u), g(u)\in F$ and $g(u)\neq 0$.
The elements of $F$ are the polynomials in $F[x]$ evaluated at $u$.

So, we have that $F\subseteq F(u)$ for $g(u)=1$.

At the theorem we have that $K=F$ is a field, that means that each nonzero element of $F$ is invertible in $F$, so
$$\forall f(u)\in F, \exists g(u)\in F \text{ such that } f(u)g(u)=1$$
So, whenever $g(u)\in F$ is nonzero, we have $1/g(u)\in F$. Therefore $f(u)/g(u)\in F$ for all $f(u)\in F$ and all nonzero $g(u)\in F$, showing that $F(u)\subseteq F$.

Why do we have that whenever $g(u)\in F$ is nonzero, we have $1/g(u)\in F$ and not whenever $f(u)\in F$ is nonzero, we have $1/f(u)\in F$ ?
We know that for each $f(x)$ there is a $g(x)$, but we don't know that for each $g(x)$ there is a $f(x)$, do we? (Wondering)
 
I am studying the mathematical formalism behind non-commutative geometry approach to quantum gravity. I was reading about Hopf algebras and their Drinfeld twist with a specific example of the Moyal-Weyl twist defined as F=exp(-iλ/2θ^(μν)∂_μ⊗∂_ν) where λ is a constant parametar and θ antisymmetric constant tensor. {∂_μ} is the basis of the tangent vector space over the underlying spacetime Now, from my understanding the enveloping algebra which appears in the definition of the Hopf algebra...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
936
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
872
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K