1
$\begingroup$

Let $F$ a field and $f\in F[X]$ a separable polynomial. Let $K_f$ the splitting field of $f$ and $G_f=\text{Gal}(K_f/F)$ his group of Galois. Show that $f$ is irreducible $\iff$ $G_f$ act transitively on the roots on $f$.

My work

$\implies :$ Let $f\in F[x]$ irreducible, $\alpha \in K_f$ a root and $\alpha _1,...,\alpha _n$ the other roots of $f$ (so $K_f=F(\alpha ,\alpha _1,...,\alpha _n)$). What I have to show (I think) is that for all $i$ there is a $\sigma \in G_f$ s.t. $\sigma \alpha =\alpha _i.$

Q1) Is it right ?

Q2) Does $f$ is the minimal polynomial of $\alpha $ ? (To me it is, but my teacher said that it can be not the case, but I don't understand why).

Since $\alpha $ and $\alpha _1$ has the same minimal polynomial, there is an isomorphism $\sigma :\alpha \longmapsto \alpha _1$. We can observe that $\sigma : F(\alpha )\longrightarrow K_f$. Now $F(\alpha ,\alpha _1)/F(\alpha )$ is algebraic, then we can extend $\sigma $ to a morphism $F(\alpha ,\alpha _1)\longrightarrow K_f$. Now, we can continue like that an extend $\sigma $ as $\psi: K_f\longrightarrow K_f$ s.t. $\psi(\alpha )=\alpha _1$.

Q3) The fact that $\psi(\alpha )=\alpha _1$ comes from the fact that $\psi|_{F(\alpha )}=\sigma $, right ?

The bijectivity is obvious since it's a field homomorphism and that $\sigma (K_f)=K_f$.

Q4) How conclude that $G_f$ act transitively on the roots ?

I don't have particular problem for the converse.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Proposition. Let $P\in K[X]\setminus K$ be separable over $K$ and $L$ be a splitting field of $P$ over $K$. Let $\mathcal{R}_L(P)$ be the roots of $P$ in $F$.

(i) $\textrm{Gal}(L/K)$ acts on $\mathcal{R}_L(P)$.

(i) $P$ is irreducible over $K$ if and only if $\textrm{Gal}(L/K)$ acts transitively on $\mathcal{R}_L(P)$.

Proof. $L/K$ is a galois extension, since $L$ is a splitting field of a separable polynomial over $K$. Let: $$G_P:=\textrm{Gal}(L/K).$$ (i) There exists $\lambda\in K^\times$ such that: $$P=\lambda\prod_{\eta\in\mathcal{R}_L(P)}(X-\eta).$$ Let $g\in G_p$ and $\eta\in\mathcal{R}_L(P)$, since $P\in K[X]$ and $L^{G_P}=K$, one has: $$P(g(\eta))=g(P(\eta))=g(0)=0.$$ Therefore, $g(\eta)\in\mathcal{R}_L(P)$ and the following map is well-defined: $$\left\{\begin{array}{ccc}G_P & \rightarrow & \mathfrak{S}(\mathcal{R}_L(P))\\g & \mapsto & g_{\vert\mathcal{R}_L(P)}\end{array}\right..$$ $G_P$ acts on $\mathcal{R}_L(P)$.

(ii) Let $\{\mathcal{O}_i\}_{i\in\{1,\ldots,k\}}$ be the pairwise distinct orbits of the action of $G_P$ on $\mathcal{R}_L(P)$. One has: $$\mathcal{R}_L(P)=\coprod_{i=1}^k\mathcal{O}_i.$$ Therefore, one derives: $$P=\lambda\prod_{\eta\in\mathcal{R}_L(P)}(X-\eta)=\lambda\prod_{i=1}^k\prod_{\eta\in\mathcal{O}_i}(X-\eta).$$ Notice that for all $i\in\{1,\ldots,k\}$, $\displaystyle\prod_{\eta\in\mathcal{O}_i}(X-\eta)$ is irreducible over $K$, since it is the minimal polynomial of an element of $\mathcal{O}_i$. Hence, $P$ is irreducible if and only if $k=1$ if and only if there is only one orbit of the action of $G_P$ on $\mathcal{R}_L(P)$ if and only if $G_P$ acts transitively on $\mathcal{R}_L(P)$. $\Box$

N.B. If you need it, I can explain why $\displaystyle\prod_{\eta\in\mathcal{O}_i}(X-\eta)$ is the minimal polynomial of an element of $\mathcal{O}_i$.

To answer precisely to your question :

Q1) You're right, this means that there is only one orbit of the action of $G_P$ on $\mathcal{R}_L(P)$.

Q2) You're teacher seems to be wrong, if $P$ is irreducible and $P(\alpha)=0$, $P$ is the minimial polynomial of $\alpha$. However, if $P$ isn't irreducible this isn't true! Indeed, let $K:=\mathbb{Q}$ and $P:=X^4-1$, then $L:=\mathbb{Q}(i)$ is a splitting field of $X^4-1$ over $\mathbb{Q}$. Howeover, $X^4-1$ is not the minimal polynomial of $i$ over $\mathbb{Q}$.

For Q3) and Q4), I am not familiar with your construction.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Sorry but you don't answers to my questions $\endgroup$ – MSE Dec 5 '15 at 23:19
  • $\begingroup$ I'll had precise answers to your questions in my post. :) $\endgroup$ – C. Falcon Dec 5 '15 at 23:24
  • $\begingroup$ Ok, thank you. I will stud this tomorrow :-) $\endgroup$ – MSE Dec 5 '15 at 23:30

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.