Definition of Algebraic closure: An extension $K$ of $F$ is called an algebraic closure of $F$ if

(a) $F \subset K$ is algebraic;

(b) $K$ is algebraically closed.

Given the above definition, I have been trying to solve the following question:

Q. Let $F \subset K$ where $K$ is algebraically closed. Let $L$ be the algebraic closure of $F$ in $K$. Then prove that $L$ is also algebraically closed.

I feel that the answer is evident from the definition, but It involves a proof. Please make some clear distinctions between 'algebraic closure' and 'algebraically closed' and explain these concepts by helping me solve the above question.

  • $\begingroup$ It might be preferable to discuss what needs to be proved first so then you can try yourself. $L$ is the set of all elements in $K$ that are roots of nonzero polynomials with coefficients in $F$. $L$ being algebraically closed means that if you take any non-constant polynomial with coefficients in $L$, it has a root in $L$. $\endgroup$
    – Dave
    Sep 10, 2014 at 0:09
  • $\begingroup$ Your definition of algebraic closure is not mine. I would say $K$ algebraically closed, and no proper subfield of $K$ that contains $F$ is algebraically closed. $\endgroup$ Sep 10, 2014 at 0:20
  • $\begingroup$ @AndréNicolas could you be a little clearer..Thanx $\endgroup$ Sep 10, 2014 at 0:21
  • $\begingroup$ Doesn't matter, yours is equivalent. $\endgroup$ Sep 10, 2014 at 0:22

3 Answers 3


I’d like to expand on @tomasz”s answer in several ways.

There are really three concepts here: (1) an algebraically closed field; (2) an algebraic closure of a field; and (3) the algebraic closure of one field in another.

I’m going to sweep some delicate points under the rug by choosing a very handy definition of an algebraically closed field: Def. A field $F$ is algebraically closed if it has no proper algebraic extensions. Now, given a field $k$, an algebraic closure of $k$ is an algebraically closed field that is algebraic over $k$. Finally, if $L\supset k$ is an extension of fields, the algebraic closure of $k$ in $L$ is the set of elements of $L$ that are algebraic over $k$. For instance, the algebraic closure of $\mathbb Q$ in $\mathbb R$ is the set (field, really) of all real algebraic numbers. The algebraic closure of $k$ in $L$ is not generally algebraically closed, nor is it an algebraic closure of $k$.

Notice that there is no unique algebraic closure of a field $k$, and that it’s necessary to prove that any two such are isomorphic (as fields containing $k$).

Now to your question. It’s to take $F\subset L$, where $L$ is algebraically closed, and to define $K$ to be the algebraic closure of $F$ in $L$, and show that $K$ is also algebraically closed. Well: $K$ is certainly an algebraic extension of $F$ (all elements are algebraic over $F$). So, let $K'$ be an algebraic extension of $K$. We have $F\subset K\subset K'$, both inclusions being algebraic. But algebraic over algebraic is still algebraic, so $K'$ is algebraic over $F$, i.e. every element of $K'$ is algebraic over $F$, so every element of $K'$ is in $K$, and you’ve shown that $K$ has no proper algebraic extensions.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @prof Lubin.........thanx a lot....your definitions were very clear and very helpful... $\endgroup$ Sep 10, 2014 at 18:51

I think the problem you have is the definition of algebraic closure of a field within an extension.

Most likely the definition is as follows: the algebraic closure of $F$ in $L\supseteq F$ is the set of roots of polynomials with coefficients in $F$. The point of the exercise, it seems to me, is that this "algebraic closure in $L$" operation is indeed a closure operation, i.e. that it is idempotent (so a polynomial whose coefficients are roots in $L$ of polynomials over $F$ is divided by a polynomial whose coefficients are in $F$).


Take a non zero polynomial $\;f(x)=a_0+a_1x+\ldots+a_nx^n\in L[x]\;$ , then $\;F(a_0,...,a_n)/F\;$ is algebraic (why?) .

But since clearly $\;f(x)\in K[x]\;$ and $\;K\;$ is alg. closed, there exists $\;k\in K\;\;s.t.\;\;f(k)=0\;$, so $\;F(a_0,...,a_n,k)/F\;$ algebraic (why?), whick means $\;k\;$ is algebraic over $\;F\;$ and thus $\;k\in L\;$ and we're done.


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.