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.

If $\phi:\mathbb{Q}(a_1\ldots,a_n)\rightarrow\mathbb{Q}(b_1,\ldots,b_n)$ is an isomorphism of finite extensions of $\mathbb{Q}$ such that $\phi(a_i)=b_i$, can one extend $\phi$ to an automorphism $\sigma$ of the composite $\mathbb{Q}(a_1,\ldots,a_n,b_1,\ldots,b_n)$? Is ther an obvious counter-example?

share|improve this question
2  
The composite is not well-defined without fixing a common extension of both fields, but I assume that you want $\mathbb{C}$ or a fixed closure $\overline{\mathbb{Q}}$ for that. –  Martin Brandenburg Dec 7 '12 at 20:15
    
Yeah I was thinking $\mathbb{C}$ –  greg Dec 7 '12 at 20:17
    
@MartinBrandenburg: when talking about algebraic extensions, you would usually assume that they're all contained in some fixed algebraic closure... –  tomasz Dec 7 '12 at 20:36
1  
If they were transcendental, they wouldn't be finite extensions. –  Hurkyl Dec 7 '12 at 22:05
    
I want to say $a = \sqrt[u]{1 + \sqrt[v]{2}}$ and $b = \sqrt[u]{1 + \zeta_v \sqrt[v]{2}}$ where $u,v$ are appropriately chosen form a counter-example. But they aren't counter-examples for very small values of $u$ and $v$. :( –  Hurkyl Dec 8 '12 at 10:44

1 Answer 1

up vote 2 down vote accepted

I've not found a definite answer yet, but here are some partial results. I can't guarantee that I have not overthought it and that there is a much simpler solution. :)

Note that by Abel's theorem on primitive element there is an $\alpha$ such that ${\bf Q}(a_1,\ldots,a_n)={\bf Q}[\alpha]$. In this case, it will also be true that ${\bf Q}[\phi(\alpha)]={\bf Q}(b_1,\ldots,b_n)$ (because $\phi$ is an isomorphism) and $\alpha$ and $\phi(\alpha)$ are conjugate.

Consider $K$, the splitting field of $\alpha$'s minimal polynomial $f_\alpha$. What you ask is equivalent to asking if there's an automorphism $\Phi$ of $K$ such that $\Phi(\alpha)=\phi(\alpha)$, and such that $\Phi(\Phi(\alpha))\in{\bf Q}[\alpha,\phi(\alpha)]$.

This is true, for example, if $\alpha$ and $\phi(\alpha)$ already generate $K$ (e.g. if $\alpha$ is a root of unity, or $\alpha=\sqrt[4]{2},\phi(\alpha)=i\sqrt[4]{2}$, or if $K$ is of prime degree), or if $\phi$ is the restriction of an involutive automorphism (e.g. if $\alpha$ and $\phi(\alpha)$ are complex conjugate), it's also true if the degree of $K$ is the product of at most two (maybe not distinct) primes (so in particular if $f_\alpha$ is at most cubic), and also if the Galois group of $K$ is bitransitive (in particular, if it is the full symmetric group, which I think is the "generic" situation), but I don't think it has to be the case.

Ideally, a counterexample would have $K$ of degree $24$ (anything less won't work, as pointed out by Hurkyl), with $f_\alpha$ of degree $4$. But then the Galois group is the full permutation group, so there's no counterexample with $f_\alpha$ of degree four. This does seem to make the hypothesis viable... but hypotheses that fail only for polynomials of degree five or more are not unheard of. ;)

share|improve this answer
    
If $f$ has degree $4$ and doesn't have a degree 24 splitting field, then either $\phi(\alpha) \in \mathbb{Q}(\alpha)$, or $\mathbb{Q}(\alpha, \phi(\alpha)) = K$ because $\mathbb{Q}(\alpha)$ is already degree 4, so any further extension is the whole thing. –  Hurkyl Dec 7 '12 at 22:11
    
@Hurkyl: good point. :) –  tomasz Dec 7 '12 at 22:14

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.