The galois group of x^4 + 1 over Q

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Daveyboy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Group
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The Galois group of the polynomial x^4 + 1 over Q is analyzed, revealing that it splits when adjoining the root \(\zeta = e^{i\pi/4} = \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2} + \frac{i\sqrt{2}}{2}\). The roots can be expressed as (x - \(\zeta\))(x - \(\zeta^2\))(x - \(\zeta^3\))(x - \(\zeta^4\)). The discussion highlights that while the degree of the extension [Q(i, \sqrt{2}):Q] is 4, the Galois group cannot simply be assumed to be S4, as it must consist of field automorphisms rather than arbitrary permutations of roots.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Galois theory and field extensions
  • Familiarity with complex numbers and their representations
  • Knowledge of polynomial factorization over the rationals
  • Concept of field automorphisms and their properties
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the definition and properties of Galois groups in detail
  • Learn about field automorphisms and their role in Galois theory
  • Explore the implications of the degree of a splitting field
  • Investigate the structure and properties of symmetric groups, specifically S4
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, particularly those specializing in algebra and number theory, as well as students seeking to deepen their understanding of Galois theory and polynomial roots.

Daveyboy
Messages
57
Reaction score
0
This thing splits if we adjoin e^ipi/4.
Let \zeta=e^ipi/4 =\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}+\frac{i\sqrt{2}}{2}
so x4+1=

(x-\zeta)(x-\zeta2)(x-\zeta3)(x-\zeta4).

Then I want to permute these roots so the Galois group is just S4.

But, Q(\zeta)=Q(i,\sqrt{2}) and [Q(i,\sqrt{2}):Q]=4 (degree)

I have the theorem that Galois group \leq degree of splitting field over base field.

Since |S4|=24 something is wrong, but what I can not find what is wrong with the logic.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Daveyboy said:
Then I want to permute these roots so the Galois group is just S4.
...but what I can not find what is wrong with the logic.

What's wrong is that you've forgotten the definition of a Galois group - it is the group of field automorphisms, not just the arbitrary permutation of roots.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
793
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
48
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K