High School Why does every subfield of Complex number have a copy of Q?

Click For Summary
Every subfield of the complex numbers contains a copy of the rational numbers due to the field axioms, which require the presence of additive and multiplicative identities. The proof involves showing that if a subfield F contains 0 and 1, it must also contain all elements of the form p/q, where p and q are integers and q is non-zero. Concerns about cycles preventing the inclusion of all rational numbers are addressed by noting that F has characteristic zero, ensuring that sums of 1 do not yield zero. The discussion clarifies that while every field of characteristic zero contains the rational numbers, not every such field is a subfield of the complex numbers. Ultimately, the proof confirms that F indeed contains the rational numbers, satisfying the original question.
  • #31
WWGD said:
But werebn't we talking about subfields?
Yes, but we also got picky. ##\mathbb{Z}_7## is a field and ##\{0,1,2,3,4,5,6\} \subset \mathbb{C}##. And yes it is no subfield, because it cannot be embedded as a field into ##\mathbb{C}##. So in the same way you take this embedding for granted, @Buffu may take ##0,1 \in F##, the additional closure or other axioms for granted, which reduces the entire exercise to: Obvious. I only wanted to say, that this property in the meaning / definition of subfield is used same as the axioms of a field are used.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
FactChecker said:
That is why I asked if you were supposed to be learning how to do proofs. We could take the entire thing for granted, but that is not a proof. We know that the axioms are true. If you are learning how to do math proofs, you have to refer to the things you know in writing where they apply and are used.

I will mention every axiom used from next time when writing proofs :).
 
  • Like
Likes FactChecker
  • #33
Buffu said:
I will mention every axiom used from next time when writing proofs :).
At least it will do no harm, except ...
Just a (not completely serious hint) in case you will turn in a paper for your master's degree or similar: Write it down in a way that you understand all steps. Make a copy for yourself. Then wipe out every second step and hand it over :wink:.
 
  • Like
Likes Buffu
  • #34
Buffu said:
I will mention every axiom used from next time when writing proofs :).
Good. The first few years of proofs should include all the steps. You will have a lot of time to learn which steps to skip. A thesis can skip some steps and an article for publication must skip a lot.
 
  • Like
Likes Buffu

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
911
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K