Consider a field $K$, let's say $K \subseteq \mathbb R$. We can consider the 'plane' $K \times K$. I am wondering in which cases the distance function $d: K \times K \to \mathbb R$, defined as is normal by $d(x, y) = \sqrt{x^2 + y^2}$, takes values in $K$.

Certainly this is not true for $\mathbb Q$: we have $d(1, 1) = \sqrt{2} \notin \mathbb Q$. If we take any $K$ which is closed under taking square roots of non-negative numbers, then certainly $d$ will take values in $K$.

However, a priori it might still be true that $a \in K$ positive has no square root, yet this does not provide an obstruction because there is no way to write $a = x^2 + y^2$. Thus I am wondering:

Are there fields $K \subseteq \mathbb R$ which do not have all square roots of positive numbers, yet are closed under $d$?

  • 7
    $\begingroup$ Just so you know, there are other distances besides euclidean distance. $\endgroup$
    – PyRulez
    Mar 21, 2019 at 23:47

2 Answers 2


Consider the tower of fields


$K_{i+1}:=K_i(\sqrt{x^2+y^2}| x,y\in K_i)$,

$K:=\bigcup_i K_i$.

Then $K$ is closed under $d$ and contains $1+\sqrt 5$ but not $\sqrt{1+\sqrt 5}$, as I have found by following the Pythagorean fields Wikipedia link given by @Dirk in his answer: If $\sqrt{1+\sqrt 5}$ were in $K$ then $1+\sqrt 5$ would be a sum of two squares in some extension $K_i$, and then it would be so in an extension of $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt 5)$, which implies that it is a sum of squares in $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt 5)$, which is impossible because that would entail that $1-\sqrt 5$, which is negative, is also a sum of squares in $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt 5)$.

The details can be found in Chapter 5 of the book Geometric constructions by Martin. The relevant results are Theorems 5.10-5.15.

Similarly, $\sqrt 2\in K$ but $\sqrt[4]2\not\in K$, and more in general, this is true for any positive number which is not a sum of squares in the first extension in which it appears.

Geometrically, numbers in $K$ correspond to constructible points by ruler and dividers. Hence $\sqrt[4]2$ is constructible by rule and compass but not by rule and dividers.

  • $\begingroup$ "which implies that it is a sum of squares in $\mathbb Q(\sqrt{5})$" -- I do not see directly how this follows from the previous sentence, but I could very well be missing something obvious. $\endgroup$ Mar 21, 2019 at 13:04
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @MeesdeVries Not obvious, it is a consequence of Theorems 5.10-5.13 in Martin's book. $\endgroup$
    – Jose Brox
    Mar 21, 2019 at 13:06
  • $\begingroup$ $K$ is countable, right? $\endgroup$
    – PyRulez
    Mar 21, 2019 at 20:00
  • $\begingroup$ @PyRulez yeah the same construction which makes $\mathbb Q$ countable from $\mathbb N^2$ plus skipping over duplicates should work to imply that $K_{i+1}$ is countable given that $K_{i}$ is countable, skipping over duplicates; by induction therefore all $K_i$ are countable; then we should be able to repeat the same construction again with $K_m(n)$, again skipping over duplicates, to find that $K$ is countable. $\endgroup$
    – CR Drost
    Mar 21, 2019 at 21:52
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @PyRulez Yes: clearly, all elements of $K$ are algebraic, and algebraic numbers are countable (there is a countable number of rational polynomials, with a finite number of roots each) $\endgroup$
    – Jose Brox
    Mar 21, 2019 at 22:57

edit: Look what I found: Wiki

The field $$\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{p} \mid p \in \mathbb{P})$$ might be a good candidate.
At least, all fields closed under $d$ must contain this field.

  • $\begingroup$ Why must a field closed under $d$ contain $\sqrt{3}$? $\endgroup$
    – FredH
    Mar 21, 2019 at 10:51
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @FredH, it must contain $\sqrt{2} = d(1, 1)$, and thus it must contain $\sqrt{3} = d(1, \sqrt{2})$. $\endgroup$ Mar 21, 2019 at 10:53
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiral_of_Theodorus $\endgroup$
    – lhf
    Mar 21, 2019 at 11:16
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ I don't think this works: $d(\sqrt 2 + 1, 1) = \sqrt{2\sqrt2 + 4}$, but that doesn't look like a sum of square roots of rational numbers. $\endgroup$
    – Arthur
    Mar 21, 2019 at 12:05

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.