Subfields of finitely generated algebras

  • Thread starter Kreizhn
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation discusses whether every subfield of a field k, which is finitely generated as an F-algebra, is also finitely generated as an F-algebra. There is no counterexample found, and it is shown that the result holds in special cases such as when k is algebraically closed or when there is a natural projection from k to L. It is also discussed that the extension of k over F may not necessarily be finite and the proof of Zariski's lemma is brought up. Finally, the conversation ends with a question about the notation used in a proof and a reference to a possible useful link.
  • #1
Kreizhn
743
1
The question is as follows: Assume that k and F are fields and that k is finitely generated as an F-algebra. It is necessarily true that every subfield of k is finitely generated as an F algebra.

I haven't been able to think of a counter example, and I can only show the result holds in special cases. Namely, if L is the subfield, I can show that L is finitely generated if (1) k is algebraically closed, (2) k is an finite degree extension over L, (3) k can be given the structure of a normed vector space over L, (4) there is a natural projection from K to L.

However, I hardly think that this could exhaust all cases. Any input would be helpful.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Can't you prove that if k is a field extension of F and if k is finitely generated as F-algebra, that the extension is finite??

Or am I saying nonsense?
 
  • #3
Kreizhn said:
The question is as follows: Assume that k and F are fields and that k is finitely generated as an F-algebra. It is necessarily true that every subfield of k is finitely generated as an F algebra.


*** Yes, since with the given data F is an algebraic extension of F and, thus, any subfield of k (containing F) is a linear subspace of k over F.

DonAntonio ***



I haven't been able to think of a counter example, and I can only show the result holds in special cases. Namely, if L is the subfield, I can show that L is finitely generated if (1) k is algebraically closed, (2) k is an finite degree extension over L, (3) k can be given the structure of a normed vector space over L, (4) there is a natural projection from K to L.

However, I hardly think that this could exhaust all cases. Any input would be helpful.

...
 
  • #4
Thanks for the replies.

I can definitely show that if k is finitely generated, it must be an algebraic extension. This is Zariski's lemma which can be shown from the Noether normalization lemma. I'm not sure that we can go so far as to say that the extension itself is finite though.

Don Antonio: I do not understand your post. F is always an algebraic extension over F, and every subfield of a field is a closed linear subspace. Why would this imply that the subfield is finitely generated?

Since k is finitely generated over F, there is a surjective map [itex] F[x_1,\ldots,x_n] \twoheadrightarrow k [/itex]. If we can find some way to project k onto L, that will give us a surjection [itex] F[x_1,\ldots,x_n] \twoheadrightarrow L [/itex]. It is sufficient to endow k with a (semi)-norm structure as a vector space over L, in which case we can find such a projection onto L with a complementary subspace via Hahn-Banach. I would like to keep "complementary condition" so that any such projection is well-defined by how it acts on the finite generators for k over F.
 
  • #5
Lemma: Let A,B be integral domains and let [itex]A\rightarrow B[/itex] be an injective integral ring homomorphism. Then A is a field iff B is a field.

Let A be a field and let [itex]b\in B[/itex] be nonzero. Then A is an A-vector space of finite dimension. As B is an integral domain, the multiplication [itex]A\rightarrow A[/itex] with b is injective. It is also A-linear and thus bijective. This shows that b is a unit.

Conversely, let B be a field and let [itex]a\in A[/itex]be nonzero. The element [itex]a^{-1}\in B[/itex] satisfies the polynomial identity

[tex](a^{-1})^n+\beta_{n-1}(a^{-1})^{n-1}+...+\beta_0=0[/tex]

Therefore,

[tex]a^{-1}=-\beta_{n-1}-...-\beta_0a^{n-1}[/tex]

This is in A.

Theorem: Let F be a field, and let k be a field extension of F that is finitely generatd as F-algebra. Then k is a finite field extension of F.

We apply Noethers Normalization theorem on k and we obtain a finite injective homomorphism [itex]F[T_1,...,T_n]\rightarrow k[/itex] of F-algebras. By the lemma, we must have n=0, and thus [itex]F\rightarrow k[/itex] is a finite extension.
 
  • #6
Kreizhn said:
Thanks for the replies.

I can definitely show that if k is finitely generated, it must be an algebraic extension. This is Zariski's lemma which can be shown from the Noether normalization lemma. I'm not sure that we can go so far as to say that the extension itself is finite though.

Don Antonio: I do not understand your post. F is always an algebraic extension over F, and every subfield of a field is a closed linear subspace. Why would this imply that the subfield is finitely generated?


*** That's obviously a typo. It should be "...k is a(n algebraic) finite extension of F...". For a proof you can

check 5.18 in page 41 in http://dangtuanhiep.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/papaioannoua_solutions_to_atiyah.pdf

DonAntonio***



Since k is finitely generated over F, there is a surjective map [itex] F[x_1,\ldots,x_n] \twoheadrightarrow k [/itex]. If we can find some way to project k onto L, that will give us a surjection [itex] F[x_1,\ldots,x_n] \twoheadrightarrow L [/itex]. It is sufficient to endow k with a (semi)-norm structure as a vector space over L, in which case we can find such a projection onto L with a complementary subspace via Hahn-Banach. I would like to keep "complementary condition" so that any such projection is well-defined by how it acts on the finite generators for k over F.

...
 
  • #7
micromass said:
We apply Noethers Normalization theorem on k and we obtain a finite injective homomorphism [itex]F[T_1,...,T_n]\rightarrow k[/itex] of F-algebras. By the lemma, we must have n=0, and thus [itex]F\rightarrow k[/itex] is a finite extension.

This is precisely the proof of Zariski, except I do not see how you can claim that the extension is finite. I completely agree that Noether normalization tells you that k will be integral over [itex] F[T_1,\ldots,T_n] [/itex], and since they are fields, n=0. Hence k is integral over F, which in the language of fields means that the extension k/F is an algebraic extension. Why is it finite?

DonAntonio: Thanks for the link, it looks useful. Unfortunately, it is hard to read the proof without knowing the precise statement that the link is proving, or without knowing the notation used. For example, is [itex] A_f [/itex] the localization of A about f? Also, I fail to see how your single sentence reply encapsulated all of this information. Clarification would be much appreciated.
 
  • #9
Kreizhn said:
This is precisely the proof of Zariski, except I do not see how you can claim that the extension is finite. I completely agree that Noether normalization tells you that k will be integral over [itex] F[T_1,\ldots,T_n] [/itex], and since they are fields, n=0. Hence k is integral over F, which in the language of fields means that the extension k/F is an algebraic extension. Why is it finite?

DonAntonio: Thanks for the link, it looks useful. Unfortunately, it is hard to read the proof without knowing the precise statement that the link is proving, or without knowing the notation used. For example, is [itex] A_f [/itex] the localization of A about f? Also, I fail to see how your single sentence reply encapsulated all of this information. Clarification would be much appreciated.


If you have the Atiyah-MacDonald book then I believe the relevant question is 5.18 (5th chatper, exercise 18). The proof

IS in the book, as is as well the fact that this statement is one of the versions of Hilbert's Nullstellensatz, something

I learned in graduate school.

The statement is: Let k be a field, B a FINITELY GENERATED k-algebra, then: if B is a field then it is a FINITE (not only algebraic) extension of k.

DonAntonio
 
  • #10
Yes okay, I think Zariski does it then. When I proved it, I must have missed the fact that the degree extension was finite. Thanks micromass.

Don Antonio: I have been deliberately trying to avoid anything resembling the Nullstellensatz as one must use an algebraically closed field and that does not encompass our current scenario. Having seen that Zariski implies that the extension is finite as well as algebraic is indeed the solution, though again I fail to see how you conveyed all of that information with your single sentence response. I appreciate your replies, but perhaps next time you could respond with more than ambiguous single line comments or obscure links for which you have somehow figured that I can not only guess the statement and notation, but even the choice of book.
 

1. What are some examples of subfields of finitely generated algebras?

Some examples of subfields of finitely generated algebras include polynomial rings, algebraic function fields, and number fields.

2. What is the significance of studying subfields of finitely generated algebras?

Studying subfields of finitely generated algebras allows us to better understand the structure and properties of these algebras. This can have implications in various fields such as mathematics, physics, and computer science.

3. How are subfields of finitely generated algebras related to finite fields?

Finite fields are a special case of subfields of finitely generated algebras, where the number of elements in the field is finite. By studying subfields of finitely generated algebras, we can gain a better understanding of finite fields as well.

4. Can subfields of finitely generated algebras be used in cryptography?

Yes, subfields of finitely generated algebras have applications in cryptography, specifically in the construction of public-key cryptosystems. They are also used in coding theory, which is essential in secure communication over noisy channels.

5. What are some open problems in the study of subfields of finitely generated algebras?

Some current open problems in this area include determining the structure and properties of subfields of finitely generated algebras in higher dimensions, as well as finding efficient algorithms for computing with these algebras.

Similar threads

  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
28
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
3
Views
1K
Back
Top