We have $n$ distinct prime numbers $p_1,\cdots ,p_n$ and I am asked to show that $[\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt[r]{p_1},\cdots ,\sqrt[r]{p_n}):\mathbb{Q}]=r^n$ where $r\in \mathbb{N}$.

I tried to solve it by induction. The case $n=1$ is trivial. If we let

$F=\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt[r]{p_1},\cdots ,\sqrt[r]{p_n})$

$E=\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt[r]{p_1},\cdots ,\sqrt[r]{p_n},\sqrt[r]{p_{n+1}})$

$L=\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt[r]{p_2},\cdots ,\sqrt[r]{p_n})$

then by the inductive hypothesis $[F:\mathbb{Q}]=r^n$, $[L:\mathbb{Q}]=r^{n-1}$, $[F:L]=r$. We want to show that $[E:F]=r$. We know that $[E:F]\leq r$. If $[E:F]<r$ then the minimal polynomial of $\sqrt[r]{p_{n+1}}$ over $F$ is

$\prod_{i\in I\subset \left \{0,\cdots ,r-1\right \}}X-\sqrt[r]{p_{n+1}}\zeta_r ^i$ where $\left |I\right |=m<r$. Looking at the last coefficient of this polynomial we obtain $\sqrt[r]{p_{n+1}^m}\zeta_r ^N\in \mathbb{R}$ for some $N\in \mathbb{N}$, whence $\zeta_r ^N=\pm 1$ and $\sqrt[r]{p_{n+1}^m}\in F$.

Therefore $\sqrt[r]{p_{n+1}^m}=\sum_{i=0}^{r-1}a_i\left (\sqrt[r]{p_1}\right )^i$ where $a_i\in L$.

I don't know how to continue, I don't even know if I am doing the right thing.

Is it true that the trace over $F/L$ of $\sqrt[r]{p_{1}^i}$ equals $0$ for every $i\neq 0$? Because in that case taking trace over $F/L$ we would obtain $0=ra_0$, thereby $a_0=0$ and I think that could be helpful.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ See this answer for on way. $\endgroup$ – Bill Dubuque Nov 14 '16 at 21:21
  • $\begingroup$ But that answer is for the case $r=2$... $\endgroup$ – solomeo paredes Nov 14 '16 at 21:26
  • $\begingroup$ It gives citations for higher degree generalizations. $\endgroup$ – Bill Dubuque Nov 14 '16 at 21:29

This question has been asked many times for the particular case $r=2$. The central technical difficulty consists in translating a condition of additive linear independence into a multiplicative one. The most convenient way is to use Kummer theory under certain hypotheses which render the problem easier than in the general references given by @Bill Dubuque. For example:

Fix $r\ge2$. Let $K$ be the cyclotomic field $\mathbf Q(\zeta_r)$ and let us prove by induction the property $(P_m)$ that $[K(\sqrt [r] {p_1} , ... , \sqrt [r]{p_m}): K]=r^m$ for all $m$'s and all primes $p_j$'s not dividing $r$, i.e. unramified in $K$. For $m=1$, the Eisenstein criterion shows that $[\mathbf Q(\sqrt[r] {p_1}):\mathbf Q]= r$, hence, by linear disjointness (which follows from the non ramification condition), $(P_1)$ holds. Suppose that $(P_{n})$ holds. Then, by Kummer theory, the subgroup $B_n$ of $K^{*}/K^{*r}$ generated by the classes of $p_1,...,p_n$ mod $K^{*r}$ is isomorphic to $(\mathbf Z/r)^{n}$ in additive notation. Since $(P_{n+1})$ is equivalent to the linear disjointness of $K(\sqrt [r] {p_1} , ... , \sqrt[r]{p_n})$ and $ K(\sqrt[r] p_{n+1})$, it amounts to showing that for any $a_{n+1} < r$, the class of $p_{n+1}^{a_{n+1}}$ cannot belong to $B_n$. Suppose the contrary, i.e. that that we have an equation $p_{n+1}^{a_{n+1}} = p_{1}^{a_1}...p_{n}^{a_n}x^r$, where $a_j < r$ and $x\in K^{*}$, or, after clearing denominators, an equality of ideals $(p_{n+1}^{a_{n+1}}).I^r = (p_{1}^{a_1}...p_{n}^{a_n}).J^r$ (¤), where $I$ and $J$ are two coprime integral ideals. To simplify notations, write $p$ for any of the $p_j$'s. Since $p$ is unramified, the principal ideal $(p)$ is prime or splits as a product $P_1...P_s$ of $s$ distinct prime ideals. The participation of $(p)$ or of any such $P_i$ to the equation (¤) is of the form $(p)^a$ or $P_i^{a}$, with $a<r$. Impossible,by the uniqueness of the prime decomposition of ideals in a Dedekind ring. Thus $(P_m)$ holds for $K$, hence, by linear disjointness, the analogous property holds for $\mathbf Q$.

Question: The non ramification hypothesis is not needed when $r=2$. When $r>2$ what happens for the divisors of $r$ ?


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.