0
$\begingroup$

I'm new to field theory and face the following exercise:

Give an example of a field extension $F/K$ such that $u,v \in F$ are transcendental over $K$, but $K(u,v) \not\simeq K(X_1, X_2).$ Hint: Consider $v$ over the field $K(u)$.

I don't have any idea of how to even start with this exercise and would appreciate any kind of help.

Thanks for any answers.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ You could take $v=u$, or, say, $u^2$. $\endgroup$ – Orest Bucicovschi Oct 16 '17 at 23:26
  • $\begingroup$ If I understand you correctly you say $v = u^2$, then applies: $K(u,v) =K(u) \simeq K(X_1)$ since u is transcendent. Am I right so far ? But how can I show $K(X_1) \not \simeq K(X_1,X_2)$ ? $\endgroup$ – 3nondatur Oct 16 '17 at 23:44
  • $\begingroup$ Update: I guess you have to take a special field to show that, I think $\mathbb{R}$ and $\mathbb{C}$ are certainly wrong for that task, but what could be a good fit? $\endgroup$ – 3nondatur Oct 16 '17 at 23:51
  • $\begingroup$ $\pi$ and $2\pi$ are both transcendental over $\mathbb{Q}$, but $\mathbb{Q}(\pi, 2\pi)$ is obviously not isomorphic to $\mathbb{Q}(X_1,X_2)$. $\endgroup$ – D_S Oct 16 '17 at 23:58
  • $\begingroup$ Look at the elliptic curve $E: y^2= x^3+x$ whose function field is $\mathbb{Q}(E)\cong\mathbb{Q}(x,\sqrt{x^3+x})\cong \mathbb{Q}(x)[y]/(y^2-x^3-x)$ $\endgroup$ – reuns Oct 17 '17 at 3:06
0
$\begingroup$

Too long for a comment: why $K(X)$ is not $K$-isomorphic to $K(X_1, X_2)$ ?

Take $r=R(X) \in K(X) \backslash K$. It is not hard to see that $X$ satisfies an algebraic equation over $K(r)$. Therefore, the extension $K(r)\subset K(X)$ is finite ( it is interesting to find the exact degree, but we won't concern with it now). So, if $r_1$, $r_2$ in $k(X) \backslash K$, the extension $K(r_1)\subset K(r_1, r_2) \subset K(X)$ is finite, and so $r_2$ is algebraically over $K(r_1)$. This is equivalent to $r_1$, $r_2$ algebraically dependent over $K$. Now, this will be true also if one of the $r_i$ is in $K$ ( that is even simpler to see).

But $X_1$, $X_2$ from $K(X_1, X_2)$ are not algebraically dependent over $K$.

(We showed that the two extensions have a different transcendent degree over $K$).

As example to the question, you can take $K= \mathbb{Q}$, and $u=v= \pi$, or any other transcendental number.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ One last question: Why do we know that $K(r_1, r_2) \subset K(X)$ holds, is it because of $r_1, r_2 \in K(x) \backslash K$ ? $\endgroup$ – 3nondatur Oct 17 '17 at 14:40

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.