Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

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

Can you please help with the following problem?

Let $K$ be a field and let $f(x) \in K[x]$ be a separable polynomial. If $E/K$ is a splitting field of $f(x)$, prove that every root of $f(x)$ in $E$ is a separable element over $K$.

My attempt:

Let $z$ be a root of $f(x)$ in $E$ and suppose $z$ is not a separable element over $K$, then by definition the minimal polynomial, say $h(x)$, of $z$ over $K$ is not separable, so we can find a repeated root $q \in E$ of $h(x)$. Now since $f(z)=0$ and $h(x)$ is the minimal polynomial of $z$ over $K$ then $h(x)|f(x)$ so that $q$ is also a repeated root of $f(x)$. This implies then that $f(x)$ is not separable in $E[x]$, this contradicts the fact that $f(x)$ is separable over K[x]$.

For this problem I'm using the fact that if $E/K$ is a field extension and $f(x) \in K[x]$ is a separable polynomial then $f(x)$ is separable when considered as an element of $E[x]$.

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 2 down vote accepted

Your argument is correct. Here is an alternative phrasing of it (only difference really is that it doesn't use an argument by contradiction):

Let $\alpha\in E$ be a root of $f$. Then $\text{Irr}(\alpha,K)\mid f$, where $\text{Irr}(\alpha,K)$ denotes the minimal polynomial for $\alpha$ over $K$. Therefore, because $f$ is a separable polynomial, we also have that $\text{Irr}(\alpha,K)$ is a separable polynomial. Thus $\alpha$ is a separable element over $K$.

share|cite|improve this answer
Thanks, essentially what I wrote right? (of course shorter heh) – user6495 May 3 '11 at 0:51
@user6495: Yes, sorry, I kind of jumped to answer - this is exactly the same as your argument. – Zev Chonoles May 3 '11 at 0:52
Thanks! sometimes I have trouble writing things clearly, thanks again. – user6495 May 3 '11 at 0:52
@user6495: No problem! The way you phrased it is great actually, you should stick with it - it explains more than mine. – Zev Chonoles May 3 '11 at 0:54

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.