2
$\begingroup$

Could anyone help me with that?

Let say that $K_1$ and $K_2$ are finite Galois extensions of $K$, I want to show that $K_1K_2$ is Galois over $K$.

Because the extensions are galois I can find separable polynomials $f_1,f_2$ in $K[X]$ such that $K_i$ is the splitting field of $f_i$.

The proof that I read affirms that $K_1K_2$ is the splitting field of $f_1f_2$ and concludes that $K_1K_2$ is Galois over $K$. But my problem is that $f_1f_2$ need not to be separable as $f_1$ and $f_2$ could share a root. But then this root would be in $K_1 \cap K_2$ which would allow us to cancel the extra term in $K_1 \cap K_2$ giving us only $K_1K_2/K_1 \cap K_2$ to be Galois...

What am I missing?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Can't you assume that $f_1,f_2$ are irreducible over $K$? That would rule out common roots (other than the trivial $K_1=K_2$). $\endgroup$ – Greg Martin Oct 19 '16 at 22:16
  • $\begingroup$ yes this is easier! $\endgroup$ – WrabbitW Oct 19 '16 at 22:52
3
$\begingroup$

You're right that this proof isn't quite correct if $f_1$ and $f_2$ have common roots. To fix it, you can let $f$ be the least common multiple of $f_1$ and $f_2$ in $K[X]$, and then show that $K_1K_2$ is the splitting field of $f$. Since $f_1$ and $f_2$ have no repeated roots, neither can $f$.

Alternatively, by the primitive element theorem, you can choose $f_1$ and $f_2$ to be irreducible (namely, the minimal polynomial of a primitive element). Then $f_1$ and $f_2$ have no common roots unless $K_1=K_2$, but in that case $K_1K_2=K_1$ is obviously Galois.

$\endgroup$

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.