6
$\begingroup$

Let $E$ be an extension of field $F$, and let $\alpha, \beta \in E$. Suppose $\alpha$ is transcendental over $F$ but algebraic over $F(\beta)$.

Show that $\beta$ is algebraic over $F(\alpha)$.

Okay, first questions: What does the notation $F(\alpha)$ and $F(\beta)$ mean? And being transcendental means it solves no equations with rational coefficients, but what does it mean for a field?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I think transcendental has nothing to do with it. Just try this: assume /beta is degree 2 and /alpha also degree 2 and try that and you'll see how it works. $\endgroup$ – tomrlopes Mar 28 '14 at 22:01
  • $\begingroup$ @tomrlopes I don't know what to "try" though, cause I don't know what type of elements are in $F(\beta)$ besides $\beta$ and elements of $F$. $\endgroup$ – terrible at math Mar 28 '14 at 22:06
  • $\begingroup$ Everything in $F(/beta)$ is a polynomial in $/beta$ I can't say too much more or I'll give it all away. $\endgroup$ – tomrlopes Mar 28 '14 at 22:09
  • $\begingroup$ @tomrlopes The claim is false if $\alpha$ is algebraic over $F$. If $\alpha$ is algebraic over $F$, it also is algebraic over $F(\beta)$ whatever $\beta$ is. So just take any $\beta$ transcendental over $F(\alpha)$ (equivalently, in this case, over $F$) for a counterexample. E.g. $\beta = T$, a new variable. $\endgroup$ – Magdiragdag Mar 29 '14 at 11:18
  • $\begingroup$ Ah, so the polynomial for $\alpha$ over $F(\beta)$ is actually over F $\endgroup$ – tomrlopes Apr 5 '14 at 2:06
5
$\begingroup$

$F(\alpha)$ means the smallest field containing both $F$ and $\alpha$.

$\gamma$ algebraic over $F$ means that there is a non-zero polynomial $p(X) \in F[X]$ (i.e., a polynomial with coefficients in $F$) with $p(\gamma) = 0$. (And transcendental means such a polynomial does not exist).

Now the problem itself. The situation is as follows.

enter image description here

Since $\alpha$ is algebraic over $F(\beta)$, there is a non-zero polynomial $f(X) \in F(\beta)[X]$ with $f(\alpha) = 0$. The coefficients are elements of $F(\beta)$, but clearing denominators we may as well assume they are elements of $F[\beta]$.

So, $f(\alpha)$ is a polynomial expression in both $\alpha$ and $\beta$ and we can see it as a polynomial expression $g(\beta)$ in $\beta$ with coefficients in $F[\alpha]$, i.e., $g(Y) \in F[\alpha][Y]$. (To be precise, there is a polynomial $h(X,Y) \in F[X,Y]$ such that $f(X) = h(X,\beta)$ and $g(Y) = h(\alpha,Y)$.) Now $0 = f(\alpha) = g(\beta)$.

What is still left to show is that $g(Y)$ is not the zero polynomial, i.e., that not all its coefficients are $0$. But its coefficients are of the form $c(\alpha)$ with $c(X) \in F[X]$ and because $\alpha$ is transcendental over $F$, $c(\alpha)$ is $0$ only if $c(X) = 0$. So, if $g(Y)$ were the zero polynomial, so would $f(X)$ be.

Example. Take $\alpha = T^2$ and $\beta = T^3$ in the field ${\mathbb Q}(T)$ of rational functions over ${\mathbb Q}$. Then $\alpha$ is transcendental over ${\mathbb Q}$. Also, $\beta$ is algebraic over ${\mathbb Q}(\alpha)$ as it satisfies $\beta^2 - \alpha^3 = 0$ (i.e., $\beta$ is a root of the polynomial $Y^2 - \alpha^3$ over ${\mathbb Q}(\alpha)$). Exactly the same relation shows that $\alpha$ is algebraic over ${\mathbb Q}(\beta)$ (as $\alpha$ is a root of the polynomial $\beta^2 - X^3$ over ${\mathbb Q}(\beta)$).

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ thank you and thank the guy below you, I am sure I can work with this. If somehow I can't, I will be back :) $\endgroup$ – terrible at math Mar 28 '14 at 19:46
  • $\begingroup$ here's what I have so far: $\alpha$ is algebraic over $F(\beta)$ so $\exists P(x) \in F(\beta)[x] $ such that $P(\alpha) = 0$, but we also know that $\alpha$ is transcendental over $F$ so this must mean our $P$ lies in $F(\beta)[x] \setminus F[x]$. This makes sense to me, but I'm having trouble reasoning what the coeffecients look like. Ideally they are all $\beta$ but I doubt that is the case? $\endgroup$ – terrible at math Mar 28 '14 at 21:22
  • $\begingroup$ The coefficients of $P$ are, at first, rational functions in $\beta$, but clearing denominators you might as well assume they are polynomials in $\beta$. Now you have a polynomial expression in both $\alpha$ and $\beta$ that equals $0$. Consider this as a polynomial in $\beta$ with coefficients in $F(\alpha)$. $\endgroup$ – Magdiragdag Mar 29 '14 at 7:24
1
$\begingroup$

$F(\alpha)$ is the smallest field that contains both $F$ and $\alpha$ inside $E$.. Being transcendental means, it solves no equations with coefficients in the given field, i.e. $\beta \in E$ is transcendental over $F(\alpha)$, if no polynomial with coefficients in $F(\alpha)$ has $\beta$ as root.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

This is an old question, but I would like to share an alternative solution I came up with when I did this exercise.

The conditions in the question is equivalent to the following diagram:

conditions

Now we claim $F(\beta)/F$ is transcendental. Suppose not, then $F(\beta)/F$ is algebraic. Since composition of algebraic extensions is algebraic, $F(\alpha, \beta)/F$ is algebraic, which contradicts $\alpha$ being transcendental over $F$.

contradiction

Hence $F(\beta)/F(\alpha)$ is transcendental.

transcendental

This means $\alpha, \beta$ are both transcendental over $F$. So $F(\alpha), F(\beta) \cong F(x)$ for some intermediate $x$ $\implies F(\alpha) \cong F(x) \cong F(\beta)$

isomorphic

Since $F(\alpha) \cong F(\beta)$, we can regard $F(\beta)$ as degree $1$ extension of $F(\alpha)$. $F(\beta)/F(\alpha)$ is algebraic since all finite extensions are algebraic.

algebraic

Finally, we use again the fact that composition of algebraic extensions is algebraic to conclude $F(\alpha, \beta)/F(\alpha)$ is algebraic.

conclude

$\endgroup$

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.