MHB Smallest subfield of C that contains i

  • Thread starter Thread starter mathmari
  • Start date Start date
mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,984
Reaction score
7
Hey! :o

I am looking at the following:
Determine the smallest subfield $\mathbb{K}$ of $\mathbb{C}$ that contains the complex number $i$.

The smallest subfield of $\mathbb{C}$ that contains the complex number $i$ is $\mathbb{K}=\mathbb{Q}(i)$, right?
Do we have to show that $\mathbb{Q}(i)=\{a+bi\mid a,b\in \mathbb{Q}\}$ is a field and then that it is the smallest subfield of $\mathbb{C}$ that contains $i$ ?

For the first part, we have to show that $\mathbb{Q}(i)$ is closed under addition and multiplication, contains both additive and multiplicative identities, contains additive inverses, and contains multiplicative inverses for all nonzero elements, right?

  • $\mathbb{Q}(i)$ is closed under addition :

    Let $x,y\in \mathbb{Q}(i)$, so $x=a_1+b_1i$ and $y=a_2+b_2i$. Then $x+y=(a_1+a_2)+(b_1+b_2)i\in \mathbb{Q}(i)$.
  • $\mathbb{Q}(i)$ is closed under multiplication :

    Let $x,y\in \mathbb{Q}(i)$, so $x=a_1+b_1i$ and $y=a_2+b_2i$. Then $x\cdot y=a_1b_1+a_1b_2i+a_2b_1i-a_2b_2=(a_1b_1-a_2b_2)+(a_1b_2+a_2b_1)i\in \mathbb{Q}(i)$.
  • $\mathbb{Q}(i)$ contains additive identity :

    The additive identity is $0 = 0+0i$.
  • $\mathbb{Q}(i)$ contains multiplicative identity :

    The multiplicative identity is $1 = 1+0i$.
  • $\mathbb{Q}(i)$ contains additive inverses

    Let $x\in \mathbb{Q}(i)$, so $x=a+bi$. Then the additive inverse is $-x=-a-bi$.
  • $\mathbb{Q}(i)$ contains multiplicative inverses for all nonzero elements

    Let $x\in \mathbb{Q}(i)$, so $x=a+bi$. Then the multiplicative inverse is $\frac{1}{x}=\frac{1}{a+bi}=\frac{a-bi}{(a+bi)(a-bi)}=\frac{a-bi}{a^2+b^2}=\frac{a}{a^2+b^2}-\frac{b}{a^2+b^2}i\in \mathbb{Q}(i)$.

So, $\mathbb{Q}(i)$ is a field. For the second part:
Any field $F$ that contains $\mathbb Q$ and $i$ also contains $qi$ with $q$ rational, since $F$ is closed under products and $q$ and $i$ belong to $F$. Since $F$ contains every rational $p$ and every number of the form $qi$ it contains also their sum $p+qi$.

This proves $Q(i)\subseteq F$, which means that $\mathbb{Q}(i)$ is the smallest subfield of $\mathbb{C}$ that contains $i$. Is everything correct? Could I improve something? (Wondering)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
mathmari said:
For the second part:
Any field $F$ that contains $\mathbb Q$ and $i$ also contains $qi$ with $q$ rational, since $F$ is closed under products and $q$ and $i$ belong to $F$. Since $F$ contains every rational $p$ and every number of the form $qi$ it contains also their sum $p+qi$.

This proves $Q(i)\subseteq F$, which means that $\mathbb{Q}(i)$ is the smallest subfield of $\mathbb{C}$ that contains $i$.

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

Hey mathmari! (Smile)

The first part looks fine to me, although we may want to mention for the multiplicative inverse that $a^2+b^2\ne 0$ so that the inverse is well defined for all $x\in \mathbb Q(i) \setminus \{0\}$.

As for the second part, it seems we're already assuming that $\mathbb Q$ must be contained in the sub field.
It's true alright, but why? (Wondering)
 
I like Serena said:
The first part looks fine to me, although we may want to mention for the multiplicative inverse that $a^2+b^2\ne 0$ so that the inverse is well defined for all $x\in \mathbb Q(i) \setminus \{0\}$.

Ah ok!

I like Serena said:
As for the second part, it seems we're already assuming that $\mathbb Q$ must be contained in the sub field.
It's true alright, but why? (Wondering)

So, we have to show that each subfield of the complex numbers contains every rational number, right?

Let $F$ be a subfield of $\mathbb{C}$.

Since $F$ is a field it must contain a distinguished element $\tilde{0}$, the additive identity. Since $F$ is a subfield of $\mathbb{C}$, we have that $F\subseteq \mathbb{C}$, so $\tilde{0}$ will be also the additive identity in $\mathbb{C}$. But this element is unique, therefore $\tilde{0} = 0$. Therefore $0 \in F$.

Since $F$ is a field it must contain a distinguished element $\tilde{1}$, the multiplicative identity. Since $F$ is a subfield of $\mathbb{C}$, we have that $F\subseteq \mathbb{C}$, so $\tilde{1}$ will be also the multiplicative identity in $\mathbb{C}$. But this element is unique, therefore $\tilde{1} = 1$. Therefore $1 \in F$.

Since $F$ is a field, it is closed under addition. We will show by induction that $\mathbb{N}\subseteq F$.
Base case: Since $1 \in F$ then we must have that $1 + 1 = 2 \in F$.
Inductive hypothesis: We suppose that $n\in F$.
Inductive step: Since $n\in F$ and $1\in F$ and since $F$ is closed under addition we get that $n+1\in F$.
So, we have that $n\in F$ for each $n\in \mathbb{N}$. This means that $\mathbb{N}\subseteq F$.

Since $F$ is a filed, it must contain all the additive inverses of all its elements. We have that $n\in \mathbb{N}\subseteq F$ so it must also $-n\in F$. So since $\mathbb{N} \subseteq F$ we must have $-\mathbb{N}=\mathbb{Z} \subseteq F$.

Since $F$ is a field, it must also contain all multiplicative inverses of its non-zero elements, therefore $\frac{1}{\mathbb{Z}}:=\left \{\frac{1}{n}\mid n\in \mathbb{Z}\right \}\subseteq F$.
Let $\frac{a}{b}$ be a rational number, with $a, b\in \mathbb{Z}$ and $b\neq 0$.
We have that $a\in \mathbb{Z}\subseteq F$ and $\frac{1}{b}\in \frac{1}{\mathbb{Z}}\subseteq F$.
Since $F$ is a field, it is closed under multiplication, we get that $\frac{a}{b}=a\cdot \frac{1}{b}\in F$.
Therefore, $F$ contains every rational number, i.e. $\mathbb{Q}\subseteq F$. Is everything correct? (Wondering)
 
Yep. (Nod)
 
I like Serena said:
Yep. (Nod)

Thank you! (Bow)
 
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...

Similar threads

Back
Top