1
$\begingroup$

Let $K$ and $L$ be extensions of $F$. Show that $KL$ is Galois over $F$ if both $K$ and $L$ are Galois over $F$. Is the converse true?

I should show $|Gal(KL/F)|=[KL:F]$ and for this I am using $|Gal(K/F)|=[K:F], |Gal(L/F)|=[L:F] $ and $[KL:F]\leq[K:F][L:F]$, and I get to the next but I do not know what else to do, could someone help me please? Is there a counterexample to the converse? Thank you in advance.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The converse is easy to disprove, what non-Galois extension do you know ? And (a separable finite extension) $K/F$ is Galois iff there is a collection of elements $\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_n$ closed under $F$-conjugaison (other roots of the $F$-minimal polynomial) such that $K = F(\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_n)$. If $K/F$ and $L/F$ are Galois then $ KL = F(\ldots)$ $\endgroup$ – reuns Oct 16 '17 at 15:55
  • $\begingroup$ @reuns $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt[4]{2})/\mathbb{Q}$ $\endgroup$ – user425181 Oct 16 '17 at 15:59
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Your proof for the direct statement is not OK as it is. $\endgroup$ – Orest Bucicovschi Oct 16 '17 at 16:01
3
$\begingroup$

To prove that the converse is not true, consider the extension $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt[3]{2},\zeta_{3})$ which is a Galois extension of $\mathbb{Q}$, but $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt[3]{2})$ is not! (Edit: Take $K=\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt[3]{2})$ and $L=\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{3})$ and $\mathbb{F}=\mathbb{Q})$ As for the direct statement, we might use splitting fields. Now, if we want to use splitting fields, if $K$ is a splitting field over $F$ for $f(x)$ and $L$ is a splitting field of $g(x)$ over $F$, then $KL$ is a splitting field of...

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Mention separability (or characteristic zero), otherwise those are only normal extensions $\endgroup$ – reuns Oct 16 '17 at 16:38

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.