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.

This is a question which came to my mind, when seeing A quick question on transcendence

Suppose $F$ is a field of characteristic $p$. Then the set of $p^n$-powers of the elements of $F$ is again a field which I denote by $F^n$ and is a subfield of $F$. Now let $d_n=[F:F^n]$.

My question is, what can be said about $F$ if we know the sequence $(d_n)_n$. Of course for finite fields $d_n$ is monotonically increasing and eventually constant. The constant will be the index degree of $F$ over the prime field $F_p$ and thus $F$ is determined up to isomorphism.

So what happens in general. Of course $d_n$ is monotonically increasing. In general $d_n$ will not be finite. This can be seen by taking $F=F_p(t_1,t_2,\ldots)$ where $t_i$ is transcendental over $F_p(t_1,t_2,\ldots,t_{i-1})$.

So now my questions:

  • Can it happen that $d_1$ is finite but $d_n$ is infinite for some $n$?

  • Under the assumption that $(d_n)_n$ is finite and the same for a field $F_1$ and $F_2$. Are these fields necessarily isomorphic?

share|improve this question
    
Wow, sorry about that; I misread parts of your question several times. It might help if you more clearly separated what you already know from your questions. –  Qiaochu Yuan Jul 22 '11 at 15:11
    
Ok, I will edit –  wood Jul 22 '11 at 15:14
2  
If $F$ is perfect then $d_n=1$ for all $n$. So, the answer of the second question is no. –  user10676 Jul 22 '11 at 15:27
3  
Consider the injection $F^1 \rightarrow F$. The map $Frob : x \mapsto x^p$ yields isomophisms $F \simeq F^1$ and $F^1 \simeq F^2$. The injection becomes $F^2 \rightarrow F^1$, which implies that $[F:F^1] = [F^1:F^2]$. So in fact $d_n = d_1^n$. –  user10676 Jul 22 '11 at 15:44
    
If you leave that as an answers, I'll accept it. Now I realize that the second question is stupid after all, since my argument above for finite fields is not correct, as your proof shows. So the entire question is a little boring, I hoped for some fancy arguments with curves over finite fields. But $d_n=d_1^n$ settles it. –  wood Jul 22 '11 at 16:02

1 Answer 1

up vote 4 down vote accepted

First, your notation seems potentially misleading: it is standard to use $F^n$ to denote the set of $n$th powers of elements of $F$. So I will use $F^{p^n}$ instead.

Second, your assertions about finite fields are incorrect (perhaps you got confused by your notation, as above?). In fact for any perfect field we have $d_n = 1$ for all $n$.

Here is a key observation: if $E/F$ is a field extension and $\sigma: E \rightarrow E$ is a field homomorphism, then $[E:F] = [\sigma(E):\sigma(F)]$. Indeed, if $\{x_i\}$ is a basis for $E/F$, then $\{\sigma(x_i)\}$ is abasis for $\sigma(E)/\sigma(F)$. Applying this with $F/F^p$ and $\sigma = (x \mapsto x^p)$, we get $[F:F^p] = [F^p:F^{p^2}]$ and thus

$d_2 = [F:F^{p^2}] = [F:F^{p}] [F^{p}:F^{p^2}] = [F:F^p] [F:F^p] = d_1^2$.

Reasoning in a similar way gives $d_n = d_1^n$ for all $n \in \mathbb{Z}^+$. So you are not getting any new information from the entire sequence $\{d_n\}$ that you don't already know from $d_1$.

As one might suspect, there are lots of fields having the same value of $d_1$. For instance, as above, all perfect fields have $d_1 = 1$. Moreover, for any positive integer $d$, any two function fields of transcendence degree $d$ over any algebraically closed field of characteristic $p$ will have $d_1 = p^d$.

share|improve this answer
2  
Good to have you back, Pete! –  Alex B. Jul 22 '11 at 16:00

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.