1
$\begingroup$

Let $k \subset K=k(a_1,\ldots,a_n)$ be a finite separable field extension (assume that $k$ is an infinite field). We know that such an extension is simple, with infinitely many primitive elements, namely, $K = k(a_1+ \lambda_2 a_2 + \cdots +\lambda_n a_n)$ for all but finitely many $k \ni \lambda$'s. Call such $\lambda$'s "good choices".

My question: Is it possible to find a condition that will guarantee that there exist two different good choices $\lambda_i , \mu_i \in k$ such that $a_1+ \lambda_2 a_2 + \cdots +\lambda_n a_n$ and $a_1+ \mu_2 a_2 + \cdots +\mu_n a_n$ are conjugate (= have the same minimal polynomial over $k$).

Edit: The answer below only deals with a specific field $k$; I will be very grateful if one can explain what happens for other fields.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

This answer is about the case $k=$ the field of rational numbers.

Perhaps you are looking for a property of a function that sends the co-ordinates of an element to conjugate's co-ordinates (in your words," good choices"). Such a mapping will co-ordinatise the field embeddings (because all field embedding have to send a primitive element to a conjugate). I want to draw your attention to the fact that except identity and complex conjugation no field homomorphisms from a number field to the complex numbers can be restriction of a continuous function with domain complex/real numbers.

As field homomorphism has to be identity on the set of rationals, and the latter being a dense set it is not possible.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Interesting! thanks. Do you think that in case that $k \neq \mathbb{Q}$ there is a chance to have a positive answer, namely, find a condition as I wish? (for example, $k \neq \{\mathbb{Q}, \mathbb{R}\}$ which has an algebraic closure of infinite degree). $\endgroup$ – user237522 Oct 24 '16 at 23:38
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I do not know much about other fields. If you want one root to generate other roots, (by expecting a formula for the conjugate of an element) you are forcing the extension to be Galois. Otherwise the formula will involve parameters outside the base field $k$. $\endgroup$ – P Vanchinathan Oct 25 '16 at 0:22

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.