10
$\begingroup$

Let $ K/ L /F $ be fields. If $K / L$ is Galois and $ L / F $ is Galois, then $ K / F$ is Galois. We mentioned this very quickly in today's class without justifying. But I have trouble seeing this. Any help is appreciated.

Our definition for $ K / F$ being Galois is the $F$-automorphism group $G = G( K / F) : = \{ \sigma \in aut (G) : \sigma_F = id_F \}$ fixes only $F$, i.e. $ \{ x \in K : \sigma (x) = x \text { for all } \sigma \in G \} = F$.

But we also showed that $ K /F$ is Galois if and only if $ K/F$ is normal and separable.

$\endgroup$
5
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ It would probably help any answerers to know what exactly what definition you have of being Galois (and, probably, if you are only considering finite extensions) $\endgroup$ May 1, 2014 at 0:59
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Galoisness is not transitive. $\endgroup$
    – blue
    May 1, 2014 at 1:01
  • $\begingroup$ Not true, as @Matt points out in his response. It’s also an error that’s all too often made. $\endgroup$
    – Lubin
    May 1, 2014 at 1:08
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you for all of you who answers! $\endgroup$
    – user112564
    May 1, 2014 at 1:10
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Galoisity? ${}{}{}$ $\endgroup$ May 1, 2014 at 1:11

2 Answers 2

10
$\begingroup$

This is not true. E.g. $\mathbb Q(\sqrt{1+2i})$ is Galois over $\mathbb Q(i)$, which is Galois over $\mathbb Q$. But $\mathbb Q(\sqrt{1+2i})$ is not Galois over $\mathbb Q$.


Another example, maybe easier to check: $\mathbb Q(\sqrt{1+\sqrt{2}}) \supset \mathbb Q(\sqrt{2})\supset \mathbb Q$.

The Galois closure will of the first field over $\mathbb Q$ will contain $\sqrt{1-\sqrt{2}}$ as well; but this is not a real number, whereas $\mathbb Q(\sqrt{1+\sqrt{2}})$ consists entirely of real numbers.

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks! But how can I see that $ \mathbb Q ( \sqrt { 1 + 2i } )$ is not Galois over $\mathbb Q $? $\endgroup$
    – user112564
    May 1, 2014 at 1:17
  • $\begingroup$ @user112564: Dear user, Its Galois closure will also contain $\mathbb Q(\sqrt{1-2i})$, and hence also $\sqrt{5}$. If it were already Galois, then (for degree reasons) it would have to equal $\mathbb Q(i,\sqrt{5})$. But you can check (with a little effort) that no element in this field squares to give $1 + 2i$. (There are other ways to see this that use a little more number theory. And there are surely other examples that are easier to check; this is just the first one that came to mind. Actually, I added another one.) Regards, $\endgroup$
    – Matt E
    May 1, 2014 at 1:18
  • 13
    $\begingroup$ Perhaps an easier example is $K=\Bbb Q(\root4\of 2)$, $L=\Bbb Q(\sqrt2)$, $F=\Bbb Q$. The splitting field of $f(x)=x^4-2$ is $\Bbb Q(\root4\of 2,i)$, after all. :) $\endgroup$ May 1, 2014 at 1:23
  • $\begingroup$ @TedShifrin: Dear Ted, Indeed. I added another more easily checked example too. (I guess it's easier to tell real from imaginary than to look at the splitting behaviour of primes above $5$!) Cheers, $\endgroup$
    – Matt E
    May 1, 2014 at 1:24
  • $\begingroup$ I got it! Thank you so much! Also thanks to Ted Shifrin. $\endgroup$
    – user112564
    May 1, 2014 at 1:28
7
$\begingroup$

In the book Abstract Algebra, third edition, by David S. Dummit and Richard M. Foote, they mention the example $\mathbb{Q}\subset\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{2})\subset\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt[4]{2})$ as a pair of Galois extensions which are not transitive:

The field $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt[4]{2})$ is not Galois over $\mathbb{Q}$ since any automorphism is determined by where it sends $\sqrt[4]{2}$ and of the four possibilities $\{\pm\sqrt[4]{2},\pm i\sqrt[4]{2}\}$, only two are elements of the field (the two real roots).

$\endgroup$

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.