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.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Consider the extension $\mathbb R/ \mathbb Q$. what is the smallest subfield $\mathbb Q(\pi)$ of $\mathbb R$ containing $\mathbb Q$ and $\pi$. I think it is $\mathbb R$. A more general question: for all transcendental elements $a$ in an extension $L/K$, we have that the smallest subfield $K(a)$ of $L$ containing $K$ and $a$ is $L$ itself. But if the element $a$ is algebraic then the smallest subfield $K(a)$ of $L$ containing $K$ and $a$ is the field $K[a]\subset L$ of elements $p(a)$, $p\in K[X]$. Is that correct? Do we have an example in which the element $a$ is algebraic and still the smallest subfield $K(a)$ of $L$ containing $K$ and $a$ is $L$ itself?

share|cite|improve this question
$\mathbb Q(\pi) = \{\frac{p(\pi)}{q(\pi)} \mid p, q\in \mathbb Q[X], q \ne 0 \}$. That doesn't equal $\mathbb R$, as it is countable. – martini Jun 25 '12 at 10:56
Dear @martini: I wanted to have a look at your website (jungenschaft...) and was attacked by a virus. Are you aware of that problem? – Georges Elencwajg Jun 25 '12 at 11:04
If $a$ is transcendental over $K$ and lies in some extension $L$, then the smallest subfield of $L$ containing $K$ is... just $K(a)$! That is, it consists of rational functions in $a$ with coefficients in $K$. That's it. – Qiaochu Yuan Jun 25 '12 at 11:09
so for transcendental elements, the smallest subfield $K(a)$ containing $K$ and $a$ is the field of fractions, $p(a)/q(a)$, $p,q\in K[X]$ is that a general statement for all transcendental elements? – palio Jun 25 '12 at 11:10
Oh i see now that we have a definition confusion. actually i DEFINE $K(a)$ as the smallest subfield containing $K$ and $a$ and not as the field of rational functions in $a$ with coefficients in $K$ and if i well understand you these two notions coincide when $a$ is transcendantel? – palio Jun 25 '12 at 11:13
up vote 1 down vote accepted

Let $K$ be a field and let $L$ be an overfield of $K$. For any $a\in L$, we define $K[a]$ to be the smallest subring of $L$ that contains $K$ and $a$, and we define $K(a)$ to be the smallest subfield of $L$ that contains $K$ and $a$. We have:

Theorem. Let $K\subseteq L$ be fields, and let $a\in L$.

  1. $K[a] = \{p(a)\mid p(x)\in K[x]\}$.
  2. $K(a) = \left.\left\{\frac{p(a)}{q(a)}\;\right|\; p(x),q(x)\in K[x], q(a)\neq 0\right\}$.
  3. If $a$ is algebraic over $K$, then $K[a]=K(a)$, and $K(a)\cong K[x]/\langle f(x)\rangle$, where $f(x)$ is the minimal irreducible of $a$ over $K$.
  4. If $a$ is transcendental over $K$, then $K(a)\cong K(x)$, the field of rational functions in one indeterminate over $K$.

In particular, note that for $K=\mathbb{Q}$, $L=\mathbb{R}$, and $a=\pi$, we have that $\mathbb{Q}(\pi)\cong\mathbb{Q}(x)$ is countable, and so cannot be isomorphic to $\mathbb{R}$.

Proof. 1. The homomorphism $K[x]\to K[a]$ induced by mapping $x\to a$ shows that $\{p(a)\mid p(x)\in K[x]\}$ is contained in $K[a]$. Conversely, the image of this map is a subring of $L$ that contains $K$ and $a$, and so $K[a]$ is contained in the right hand side; this proves 1.

  1. $K[a]\subseteq K(a)$, so $K(a)$ contains the field of fractions of $K[a]$, which is the right hand side of 2. Conversely, the right hand side is easily seen to be a field that contains both $K$ and $a$, giving the other inclusion.

3 and 4. If $a$ is transcendental, then the map $K[x]\to K(a)$ is one-to-one, and so induces an embedding $K(x)\hookrightarrow K(a)$. By the description in 2 the map is onto, giving the isomorphism in 4. If $a$ is algebraic, then the kernel of the map $K[x]\to K[a]$ given by evaluation is the ideal generated by the minimal polynomial of $a$ over $K$. This is an irreducible, so $\langle f(x)\rangle$ is a maximal ideal of $K[x]$, hence the quotient $K[x]/\langle f(x)\rangle$ is a field; this field embeds into $K[a]$ and by 1 is onto, showing that $K[a]$ is actually a field (and hence equal to $K(a)$), and giving the isomorphism in 3. $\Box$

Your other assertions are incorrect: Say $L=\mathbb{Q}(x)$, $K=\mathbb{Q}$, and $a=x^2$. Then $a$ is transcendental over $K$, but $K(a)\neq L$; worse, take $L=\mathbb{Q}(x_1,\ldots,x_n)$ and $a=x_1$; then $L$ is a transcendental extension of $K(a)$.

As to the final question, note that by the Primitive Element Theorem, if $L$ is any finite separable extension of $K$, then there exists $a\in L$ such that $L=K(a)$; so for example every finite algebraic extension of $\mathbb{Q}$ will have one such $a$.

share|cite|improve this answer

Most of the question has been handled in the comments, all but the very last bit.

If $a$ is algebraic over $K$, and we take $L$ to be $K(a)$, then of course the smallest subfield of $L$ containing $K$ and $a$ is $L$ itself.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


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.