8
$\begingroup$

If $K$ and $k$ are fields, $K\supset k$ is a field extension and $\alpha \in K$ is algebraic over $k$, then we denote by $k[\alpha]$ the set of elements of $K$ which can be obtained as polynomial expressions of $\alpha$.

$$k[\alpha] = \left\{P(\alpha): \quad P\in k[X] \right\} $$

Also, we denote by $k(\alpha)$ the smallest subfield of $K$ containing both $k$ and $\{\alpha\}$. This is easily seen to be equal to the set of fractions of polynomial expressions in $\alpha$ (just thinking about the way the "smallest" subfield must be generated):

$$k(\alpha) = \left\{\dfrac{P(\alpha)}{Q(\alpha)}: \quad P,Q\in k[X] \text{ and } Q(\alpha)\neq 0 \right\} $$

If $M$ is the minimal polynomial of $\alpha$, it is easily shown that $k[\alpha]\simeq k[X]/\langle M\rangle$ is a field and therefore a subfield of $k(\alpha)$ containing both $k$ and $\{\alpha\}$. Therefore $k(\alpha)=k[\alpha]$, because $k(\alpha)$ is the smallest.

It follows that all quotients $\dfrac{P(\alpha)}{Q(\alpha)}$ are equal to $H(\alpha)$ for some polynomial $H\in k[X]$.

What I want to see is a more direct proof of this fact. Given $P$ and $Q$, how do you produce this $H$?

$\endgroup$
6
$\begingroup$

I'll write $a$ instead of $\alpha$. Let $f$ be its minimal polynomial.

Suppose $Q$ is a polynomial such that $Q(a)\neq0$. Then $f$ and $Q$ are coprime, so there exists polynomials $u$ and $v$ such that $uf+vQ=1$, and evaluating at $a$ we see that $1=v(a)Q(a)$ so that $1/Q(a)=v(a)$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ You should probably note that $q(x)=f(x)q_1(x)+r(x)$ (or similar) as well, to show how you reduce to the relatively prime case. $\endgroup$ – Adam Hughes Feb 9 '15 at 21:38
  • $\begingroup$ @AdamHughes, I don't understand why. If you look at the description of $k(a)$ given by the OP, that is irrelevant. $\endgroup$ – Mariano Suárez-Álvarez Feb 9 '15 at 21:46
  • $\begingroup$ Just my experience that my students sometimes have trouble realizing why "no shared roots" implies "coprime" in a non-algebraically closed field. It may be that the op can easily see this, that's why I was a bit weaselly by saying "probably," since I'm not 100% convinced it's really necessary. $\endgroup$ – Adam Hughes Feb 9 '15 at 21:48
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks Mariano. This answers exactly the question asked. $\endgroup$ – Owen Feb 10 '15 at 1:58
5
$\begingroup$

It is clear that $k[\alpha]\subseteq k(\alpha)$, so all we need to show is that $k[\alpha]$ is a field. Indeed, $k(\alpha)$ is contained in every subfield of $K$ that contains $\alpha$.

Let $\beta\in k[\alpha]$, $\beta\notin k$. Then $\beta$ is algebraic over $k$; indeed, the powers of $\beta$ cannot be linearly independent over $k$, as $k[\alpha]$ is finitely generated as a vector space over $k$ (you need just polynomial division with remainder to show this).

Let $a_0+a_1\beta+\dots+a_n\beta^n=0$ with $a_0\ne0$ (this surely exists, why?). Then $n\ge1$ and so $$ \beta\frac{a_1+a_2\beta+\dots+a_n\beta^{n-1}}{-a_0}=1 $$ so $\beta^{-1}\in k[\alpha]$.

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

Alternative to Bezout is linear algebra: $\ k[\alpha] \,\cong\, k[x]/f\,$ is a finite-dimensional $\,k$-vector space. If $\ \color{#c00}{g\not\equiv 0}\ $ then, by below, the linear map $\ \ell\,:\, h\,\mapsto\, gh\,$ is $\,1$-$1\,$ so onto, so $\ gh = 1\,$ for some $\,h.$

$$ h\in \ker\,\ell \iff g h \equiv 0\!\!\!\pmod{\! f} \iff f\mid gh\ \!\!\!\overset{\large\ \ \ {\rm prime}\ \color{#c00}{f\,\nmid \,g}}\iff\ f\mid h \iff h\equiv 0\!\!\!\pmod{\! f} $$

Remark $ $ From this linear viewpoint, we can compute the inverse by simply inverting the matrix that represents the linear map. For example, let's consider $\,\Bbb C \cong \Bbb R[i]\,\cong \Bbb R[x]/(x^2+1).\,$

The matrix rep of $\rm\:\alpha = a+b\,{\it i}\:$ is simply the matrix representation of the $\:\Bbb R$-linear map $\rm\:x\to \alpha\, x\:$ viewing $\,\Bbb C\cong \Bbb R^2$ as vector space over $\,\Bbb R.\,$ Computing the coefficients of $\,\alpha\ne 0\,$ wrt basis $\,[1,\,{\it i}\,]^T\:$

$$\rm (a+b\,{\it i}\,) \left[ \begin{array}{c} 1 \\ {\it i} \end{array} \right] \,=\, \left[\begin{array}{r}\rm a+b\,{\it i}\\\rm -b+a\,{\it i} \end{array} \right] \,=\, \left[\begin{array}{rr}\rm a &\rm b\\\rm -b &\rm a \end{array} \right] \left[\begin{array}{c} 1 \\ {\it i} \end{array} \right]\qquad$$

Now inverting $\,\alpha\,$ amounts to simply inverting it in matrix representation

$$ \rm \dfrac{1}{\alpha}\ =\ (a + b\,{\it i }\,)^{-1}\ \leftrightarrow\ \left[\begin{array}{rr}\rm a &\rm b\\\rm -b &\rm a \end{array} \right]^{-1}\! =\ \dfrac{1}{a^2+b^2}\left[\begin{array}{rr}\rm a &\rm -b\\\rm b &\rm a \end{array} \right]\ \leftrightarrow\ \dfrac{a-b\,{\it i}}{a^2+b^2} \ =\ \dfrac{\bar \alpha}{\alpha\bar\alpha}\qquad $$

which may be viewed as a generalization of rationalizing the denominator.

$\endgroup$

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.