1
$\begingroup$

Assume that all elements under discussion are algebraic over $F$.

Let the notation "$K=F(A)$" mean that $A\subseteq K$ and there is an injective homomorphism $\sigma:F\to K$, and every element of $K$ can be written as a rational function using elements from the image of $\sigma$ and from $A$.

What I'd like is to prove that the union of two finite field extensions of a base field $F$ is also a finite field extension of $F$. That is, if $K=F(\alpha_i)$ and $L=F(\beta_i)$ for some finite sets $\{\alpha_i\}$, $\{\beta_i\}$, then there is a field $M$ such that $M=F(\gamma_i)$ for some finite set $\{\gamma_i\}$ and there are injective homomorphisms from $K,L\to M$. Note in particular that I don't have a splitting field to work over, since this is part of the proof of the existence of a splitting field.

My original idea was to form the set $R$ of polynomials in $K$ with $n$ variables (where there are $n$ different $\beta_i$ variables), then take the set $R/I$ where $I$ is the ideal generated by all polynomials in $F$ (treated as a subset of $L$) whose evaluation under the map $x_i\mapsto\beta_i$ evaluates to $0$, but then I got confused since this always seems to build a larger field, even if you take $K\cup K$. If I take $K=\Bbb Q(\sqrt[3]{2})$ union with itself three times, do I get a field that splits $x^3-2$? If not, how do I get such a splitting field (for this one polynomial)?

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Being a finite extension is not equivalent to adjoining a finite set of elements - the elements need to be algebraic, in which case they must already exist within some extension of the base field. Note that "the union" of extensions is ill-defined: they need to exist within a common larger field in order to take the union. Even in that case, taking the union of two fields will not be a field generally (for not closed under the operations). You're speaking of the compositum of extensions, which is the join in some lattice of extensions ordered by inclusion. $\endgroup$ – anon Nov 27 '14 at 1:06
  • $\begingroup$ Also, the set of rational functions (with scalars from a field) is a field, so there will be no proper nonzero ideals to quotient it by. You need to think about quotienting rings of polynomials. $\endgroup$ – anon Nov 27 '14 at 1:09
  • $\begingroup$ @anon I realize that "the union" is ill-defined, and literally taking the union of the base sets won't give me anything close to what I want; the purpose of this question is to find a suitable definition for it. If both fields were subfields of a bigger field, $\overline{A\cup B}$ would do the trick (where the bar means take the closure w.r.t the field operations). $\endgroup$ – Mario Carneiro Nov 27 '14 at 1:27
  • $\begingroup$ @anon Regarding "Being a finite extension is not equivalent to adjoining a finite set of elements", you are right, but these are algebraic field extensions (which are stages in building a complete splitting field on $F$), so we can assume that all the elements in $K,L,M$ are algebraic over $F$. $\endgroup$ – Mario Carneiro Nov 27 '14 at 1:34
  • $\begingroup$ Minor aside: you need to fix the embedding $F \to K$ rather than just require its existence: as an example of the problem, if I let $F = \mathbb{Q}(x)$ be the field of rational functions with rational coefficients, and $K = F(\sqrt{x})$, the algebraic extension of $F$ obtained by adjoining a square root of $x$, then the definition you gave would imply that $K = F(\varnothing)$. $\endgroup$ – Hurkyl Nov 27 '14 at 1:48
1
$\begingroup$

It's safe to add one element at a time.

If $K = F(\alpha)$ is a field extension of $F$, then $K \cong F[x] / f(x)$, where $f(x)$ is the minimal polynomial of $\alpha$ over $K$. Thus, if $R$ is any ring over $F$, then the ring homomorphisms $K \to L$ are in one-to-one correspondence with elements $\beta \in R$ satisfying $f(\beta) = 0$.

Now let $K$ and $F(\alpha)$ be field extensions of $F$. You construct the ring $R = K[x] / f(x)$, where $f(x)$ is the minimal polynomial of $\alpha$ (over $F$). It is indeed possible that $R$ is not a field; this happens if and only if $f(x)$ is not irreducible.

So to fix things, what you need is to find an irreducible polynomial $g(x)$ over $K$ such that one of the roots of $g(x)$ is a root of $f(x)$....


An alternative approach, I think, is to recognize that $R$ constructed above is a product of fields.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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