I have now engaged in studying Galois Theory from NPTEL online lecture series which encompasses Finite Fields and Galois Theory. While watching the $48$-th lecture on Discriminant of a Polynomial a proposition has been discussed which I failed to understand properly.
Before going to the main proposition let us first define formally the discriminant of a polynomial.
Let $K$ be a field. Let $f_n$ denote general monic polynomial of degree $n$ i.e. it is of the form $$f_n = (X-X_1)(X-X_2) \cdots (X-X_n).$$
Let $V(X_1,X_2, \cdots, X_n)$ denote the Vandermonde deteminant in $X_1,X_2, \cdots X_n.$ So $$V(X_1,X_2, \cdots , X_n) = \prod\limits_{1 \leq i < j \leq n} (X_j - X_i).$$ Now the discriminant of $f_n$ is denoted by $D(f_n)$ and it is defined as $$D(f_n):= {V(X_1,X_2, \cdots , X_n)}^2 = \prod\limits_{1 \leq i < j \leq n} {(X_j - X_i)}^2.$$
Now let us take any monic polynomial $f \in K[X]$ of degree $n.$ Let $f=X^n + a_1 X^{n-1} + \cdots + a_n.$ Then by Kronecker's theorem $\exists$ a finite field extension $L|K$ such that $f$ splits completely into linear factors in $L[X].$ Let $x_1,x_2, \cdots , x_n$ be the zeros of $f$ lying in $L.$ Then it is clear that $(-1)^r a_r = S_r (x_1,x_2,\cdots , x_n)$ for $r=1,2, \cdots , n$ where $S_r$ is the $r$-th elementary symmetric polynomial in $n$-variables $X_1,X_2, \cdots , X_n$ i.e. $$S_r = \sum\limits_{1 \leq i_1 < i_2 < \cdots < i_r \leq n} X_{i_1} X_{i_2} \cdots X_{i_n}$$ for $r=1,2, \cdots , n.$ Now the discriminant of $f$ is denoted by $D(f)$ and is defined as $$\begin{align*} D(f) & = D(f_n) (-a_1, \cdots , (-1)^r a_r , \cdots , (-1)^n a_n ) \\ & = D(f_n) (S_1(x_1,x_2, \cdots , x_n), S_2(x_1,x_2, \cdots , x_n), \cdots , S_n (x_1,x_2, \cdots , x_n)). \end{align*}$$
By Fundamental Theorem of Symmetric Polynomials it is easy to show that $D(f) \in K.$ Now let us come back to the main proposition.
$\textbf {Proposition} :$ Let $f(X) \in K[X]$ be a monic polynomial of degree $n$ and $x_1,x_2, \cdots , x_n \in L$ be all zeros of $f$ in a finite field extension $L|K.$ Then $$D(f)= {V(x_1,x_2, \cdots , x_n)}^2 = \prod\limits_{1 \leq i < j \leq n} (x_j - x_i)^2.$$
In the proof of the above proposition the instructor wrote down an equality without giving any proper reasoning behind it. He said that $$D(f_n) (-a_1, \cdots , (-1)^r a_r , \cdots ,(-1)^n a_n ) = D(f_n) (x_1,x_2, \cdots , x_n).$$
But why is it always the case? The thing what he wrote implies $$D(f_n)(x_1,x_2, \cdots , x_n) = D(f_n) (S_1(x_1,x_2, \cdots ,x_n), S_2(x_1,x_2. \cdots , x_n), \cdots , S_n (x_1,x_2, \cdots ,x_n)).$$
But I don't understand why it necessarily holds. For instance let $K= \Bbb Q$ and $L=\Bbb Q (\sqrt 2).$ Let $f=X^2-2 \in \Bbb Q[x].$ Then $f$ splits completely into linear factors in $L[X].$ The zeros of $f$ are $\pm \sqrt 2 \in L.$ Let $x_1 = \sqrt 2$ and $x_2 = -\sqrt 2.$ Then $S_1(x_1,x_2) = x_1 + x_2 = \sqrt 2 - \sqrt 2 = 0$ and $S_2(x_1,x_2) = x_1x_2 = \sqrt 2 (- \sqrt 2) = -2.$ If the equality holds then we must have $D(f_2)(\sqrt 2 , - \sqrt 2) = D(f_2) (0,-2).$ But $D(f_2) (\sqrt 2, - \sqrt 2) = 8 \neq 4 = D(f_2) (0,-2).$ So the equality is in general false. So ultimately we get a false proof of the above proposition.
How do I manage to overcome the mistake in the lecture to prove the above proposition? Any suggestion regarding this will be highly appreciated.
Thank you very much for your valuable time for reading.
Source $:$ https://youtu.be/PPI_3yVTHzQ?list=PLOzRYVm0a65dsCb_gMYe3R-ZGs53jjw02&t=1219