Field Theory - Nicholson - Algebraic Extensions - Section 6.2 - Example 13

In summary, field theory is a branch of abstract algebra that studies the properties and structures of fields, which are algebraic structures that satisfy certain axioms such as commutativity, associativity, and distributivity. Nicholson is a mathematician who made significant contributions to field theory, particularly in the area of algebraic extensions. Algebraic extensions are field extensions in which all elements are algebraic over the base field, meaning that every element satisfies a polynomial equation with coefficients in the base field. Section 6.2 of Nicholson's book focuses on algebraic extensions and their properties, including the concept of minimal polynomial and the degree of an extension, and provides an example of finding the minimal polynomial of an algebraic number over a given field.
  • #1
Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
3,998
48
xample 13 from Nicholson: Introduction to Abstract Algebra, Section 6.2, page 282 reads as follows: (see attachment)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Example 13: If [TEX] u = \sqrt[3]{2} [/TEX] show that [TEX] \mathbb{Q}(u) = \mathbb{Q}(u)^2 [/TEX]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The solution comes down to the following:

Given [TEX] \mathbb{Q}(u) \supseteq \mathbb{Q}(u)^2 \supseteq \mathbb{Q} [/TEX]

so [TEX] [ \mathbb{Q}(u) \ : \ \mathbb{Q}] = [ \mathbb{Q}(u) \ : \ \mathbb{Q}(u)^2] \ [ \mathbb{Q}(u)^2 \ : \ \mathbb{Q} ] [/TEX]

Now Nicholson shows that [TEX] [ \mathbb{Q}(u) \ : \ \mathbb{Q}] = 3 [/TEX] and [TEX] [ \mathbb{Q}(u)^2 \ : \ \mathbb{Q} ] = 3 [/TEX]

so [TEX] [ \mathbb{Q}(u) \ : \ \mathbb{Q}(u)^2] = 1 [/TEX]

Then Nicholson (I think) concludes that [TEX] \mathbb{Q}(u) = \mathbb{Q}(u)^2 [/TEX]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My problem is as follows:

How (exactly) does it follow that:

[TEX] [ \mathbb{Q}(u) \ : \ \mathbb{Q}(u)^2] = 1 \Longrightarrow \mathbb{Q}(u) = \mathbb{Q}(u)^2 [/TEX]

Can someone help?

Peter
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Peter said:
xample 13 from Nicholson: Introduction to Abstract Algebra, Section 6.2, page 282 reads as follows: (see attachment)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Example 13: If [TEX] u = \sqrt[3]{2} [/TEX] show that [TEX] \mathbb{Q}(u) = \mathbb{Q}(u)^2 [/TEX]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The solution comes down to the following:

Given [TEX] \mathbb{Q}(u) \supseteq \mathbb{Q}(u)^2 \supseteq \mathbb{Q} [/TEX]

so [TEX] [ \mathbb{Q}(u) \ : \ \mathbb{Q}] = [ \mathbb{Q}(u) \ : \ \mathbb{Q}(u)^2] \ [ \mathbb{Q}(u)^2 \ : \ \mathbb{Q} ] [/TEX]

Now Nicholson shows that [TEX] [ \mathbb{Q}(u) \ : \ \mathbb{Q}] = 3 [/TEX] and [TEX] [ \mathbb{Q}(u)^2 \ : \ \mathbb{Q} ] = 3 [/TEX]

so [TEX] [ \mathbb{Q}(u) \ : \ \mathbb{Q}(u)^2] = 1 [/TEX]

Then Nicholson (I think) concludes that [TEX] \mathbb{Q}(u) = \mathbb{Q}(u)^2 [/TEX]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My problem is as follows:

How (exactly) does it follow that:

[TEX] [ \mathbb{Q}(u) \ : \ \mathbb{Q}(u)^2] = 1 \Longrightarrow \mathbb{Q}(u) = \mathbb{Q}(u)^2 [/TEX]

Can someone help?

Peter
I'd like to point put that the notation you are using is incorrect (or at least not standard). You write $\mathbb Q(u)^2$. I think you mean $\mathbb Q(u^2)$.

Now. We prove the following general fact.

Let $E$ be an extension of a field $F$ with $[E:F]=1$. Then $E=F$.

Proof: Suppose not. Then there is an element $a \in E\setminus F$. Clearly $a$ is algebraic over $F$. But since $[E:F(a)][F(a):F]=[E:F]=1$, we must have $[F(a):F]=1$. This forces $a\in F$ (as discussed in one of your previous threads). Thus we arrive at a contradiction. Thus $E=F$.

From here it is easy to see that $[\mathbb Q(u):\mathbb Q(u^2)]=1$ gives $\mathbb Q(u)=\mathbb Q(u^2)$ by putting $E=\mathbb Q(u)$ and $F=\mathbb Q(u^2)$ in the above claim.
 
  • #3
caffeinemachine said:
I'd like to point put that the notation you are using is incorrect (or at least not standard). You write $\mathbb Q(u)^2$. I think you mean $\mathbb Q(u^2)$.

Now. We prove the following general fact.

Let $E$ be an extension of a field $F$ with $[E:F]=1$. Then $E=F$.

Proof: Suppose not. Then there is an element $a \in E\setminus F$. Clearly $a$ is algebraic over $F$. But since $[E:F(a)][F(a):F]=[E:F]=1$, we must have $[F(a):F]=1$. This forces $a\in F$ (as discussed in one of your previous threads). Thus we arrive at a contradiction. Thus $E=F$.

From here it is easy to see that $[\mathbb Q(u):\mathbb Q(u^2)]=1$ gives $\mathbb Q(u)=\mathbb Q(u^2)$ by putting $E=\mathbb Q(u)$ and $F=\mathbb Q(u^2)$ in the above claim.

Thanks caffeinemachine.

Yes, notation was wrong ... Was a typo, but you are correct to point it out!

Peter
 
  • #4
Another approach:

Suppose $[E:F] = 1$ with $E$ algebraic over $F$, and assume $a \in E\setminus F$.

Then $a$ satisfies a polynomial of degree 1 in $F[x]$, say:

$f(x) = c_0 + c_1x$, where $c_1 \neq 0$.

Thus $c_0 + c_1a = 0$ so that: $a = -\dfrac{c_0}{c_1} \in F$, contradiction.

Thus $E = F$.

Yet another way to see this:

If $[E:F] = 1$, then $E$ as a vector space over $F$ has dimension 1. Since $1 \neq 0$ in $F$, we see that $\{1\}$ is a basis for $E$ over $F$, and hence any element $a \in E$ is of the form:

$a = c_0(1) = c_0$ for some $c_0 \in F$, that is: $E \subseteq F$, and since $F \subseteq E$ is trivial, we must have $E = F$.
 
  • #5
Deveno said:
Another approach:

Suppose $[E:F] = 1$ with $E$ algebraic over $F$, and assume $a \in E\setminus F$.

Then $a$ satisfies a polynomial of degree 1 in $F[x]$, say:

$f(x) = c_0 + c_1x$, where $c_1 \neq 0$.

Thus $c_0 + c_1a = 0$ so that: $a = -\dfrac{c_0}{c_1} \in F$, contradiction.

Thus $E = F$.

Yet another way to see this:

If $[E:F] = 1$, then $E$ as a vector space over $F$ has dimension 1. Since $1 \neq 0$ in $F$, we see that $\{1\}$ is a basis for $E$ over $F$, and hence any element $a \in E$ is of the form:

$a = c_0(1) = c_0$ for some $c_0 \in F$, that is: $E \subseteq F$, and since $F \subseteq E$ is trivial, we must have $E = F$.
Thanks Deveno. Appreciate your help.

Peter
 

Related to Field Theory - Nicholson - Algebraic Extensions - Section 6.2 - Example 13

1. What is field theory?

Field theory is a branch of abstract algebra that studies the properties and structures of fields, which are algebraic structures that satisfy certain axioms such as commutativity, associativity, and distributivity.

2. Who is Nicholson and what is their contribution to field theory?

Nicholson is a mathematician who made significant contributions to field theory, particularly in the area of algebraic extensions. In Section 6.2 of his book, he presents an example that illustrates the concept of algebraic extensions in depth.

3. What are algebraic extensions?

Algebraic extensions are field extensions in which all elements are algebraic over the base field. This means that every element of the extension field satisfies a polynomial equation with coefficients in the base field.

4. What is Section 6.2 in Nicholson's book about?

Section 6.2 of Nicholson's book focuses on algebraic extensions and their properties, including the concept of minimal polynomial and the degree of an extension. It also includes an example that demonstrates how to find the minimal polynomial of an algebraic number over a given field.

5. Can you provide an example of an algebraic extension?

Sure, consider the field extension Q(√2)/Q, where Q(√2) is the field of numbers of the form a + b√2, where a and b are rational numbers. This is an algebraic extension because every element in Q(√2) satisfies the polynomial equation x^2 - 2 = 0 with coefficients in Q.

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
6
Views
2K
Back
Top