Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I'm not terribly familiar with field theory, so I'd appreciate some help understanding this homework problem. For context, this problem is for an algebraic geometry course, in relation to function fields of varieties.

Let $k\subseteq L$ be a field extension. Let $S, R\subset L$ be two subsets. Show that if $k(S)$ is finite over $k$ and $k(R)$ is finite over $k$, then $k(S,R)$ is finite over $k$.

My question is: what exactly does it mean that $k(blah)$ is finite over $k$? And is this equivalent to having transcendence degree of $0$?

share|improve this question

2 Answers 2

up vote 2 down vote accepted

Ok so every field is a vector space over itself. Also given an extension of fields $L/K$, the field $L$ is a $K$-vector space (check this).

When the dimension is finite nice things happen so we study that first. The phrase "$L$ is finite over $K$" is referring to this behaviour.

So from your question you are being told that $K(R)$ is finite over $K$, thus there is a finite basis for $K(R)$ as a $K$-vector space. Similarly for $K(S)$. Now how might you make a basis for $K(R,S)$? Can you at least make a finite spanning set?

share|improve this answer

Being finite means it has finite dimension as a vector space over $k$.

This implies that it is algebraic over $k$ but not every algebraic extension is finite and so, no, it's not the same as having transcendence degree zero.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.