Show that $F[alpha] = { f(alpha): f(x) in F[x]}$ is a field iff $alpha$ is algebraic over F
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I don't even know where to start in this exercise. Let $E$ be a field extension of $F$. An element $alpha in E$ is algebraic iff $F[alpha] = { f(alpha): f(x) in F[x] }$ is a field. Can anyone give some tips on how to prove it? It seems kind of counterintuitive for me.
edit: I posted an answer to the exercise. If anyone wants to comment to see if it sounds right, I would be very glad.
polynomials field-theory extension-field
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I don't even know where to start in this exercise. Let $E$ be a field extension of $F$. An element $alpha in E$ is algebraic iff $F[alpha] = { f(alpha): f(x) in F[x] }$ is a field. Can anyone give some tips on how to prove it? It seems kind of counterintuitive for me.
edit: I posted an answer to the exercise. If anyone wants to comment to see if it sounds right, I would be very glad.
polynomials field-theory extension-field
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I don't even know where to start in this exercise. Let $E$ be a field extension of $F$. An element $alpha in E$ is algebraic iff $F[alpha] = { f(alpha): f(x) in F[x] }$ is a field. Can anyone give some tips on how to prove it? It seems kind of counterintuitive for me.
edit: I posted an answer to the exercise. If anyone wants to comment to see if it sounds right, I would be very glad.
polynomials field-theory extension-field
I don't even know where to start in this exercise. Let $E$ be a field extension of $F$. An element $alpha in E$ is algebraic iff $F[alpha] = { f(alpha): f(x) in F[x] }$ is a field. Can anyone give some tips on how to prove it? It seems kind of counterintuitive for me.
edit: I posted an answer to the exercise. If anyone wants to comment to see if it sounds right, I would be very glad.
polynomials field-theory extension-field
polynomials field-theory extension-field
edited Nov 25 at 7:47
asked Nov 25 at 4:01
Nuntractatuses Amável
57212
57212
add a comment |
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
Hint: $F[alpha]$ is a field if and only if $alpha^{-1}in F[alpha]$. Show that the latter is equivalent to $alpha$ is algebraic.
Your answer has helped me to see that if $F[alpha]$ is a field, then $alpha$ is algebraic. But I can't seem to prove the reciprocal.
– Nuntractatuses Amável
Nov 25 at 4:50
If $alpha$ is algebraic, write down its minimal polynomial, which has nonzero constant term. Can you find what is $alpha^{-1}$ from this?
– Eclipse Sun
Nov 25 at 16:46
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
How about this for an answer?
Suppose that $F[alpha]$ is a field. Then, $alpha^{-1} in F[alpha]$, so there is a polynomial $g(x) in F[x]$ such that $g(alpha) = alpha^{-1}$. Then we have that $alpha g(alpha) = 1$, which implies that $alpha$ satisfies $xg(x) - 1 in F[x]$. So we have that $alpha$ is algebraic over $F$.
Conversely, let $p(x) in F[x]$ be the minimal polynomial (that is, the unique monic irreducible polynomial) such that $p(alpha) = 0$ and consider the evaluation map $phi: F[x] to E$ defined by $phi (f(x)) = f(alpha)$. Then we have $kerphi = {f(x) in F[x]: f(alpha) = 0} = langle p(x) rangle$. Because $p(x)$ is irreducible, $F[x]/langle p(x) rangle$ is a field and, by the isomorphism theorem, is isomorphic to $phi(F[x]) = {f(alpha): f(x) in F[x]}$, implying that the latter is a field.
Does it sound right?
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
The theorem you want to use is Bézout's Lemma:
If $f, g in F[x]$ are coprime then there exists $lambda, mu in F[x]$ such that $$lambda f + mu g = 1. $$
Generally speaking, this is the theorem you should look for for finding inverses modulo something. For instance if $f(alpha) = 0$ then this gives
$$ mu(alpha) g(alpha) = 1. $$
Or if instead you looked at $F[x]/(f)$ then you get
$$ mu g equiv 1 pmod f $$
(These are related ideas.)
The other direction, Eclipse Sun already hinted at.
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
Hint: $F[alpha]$ is a field if and only if $alpha^{-1}in F[alpha]$. Show that the latter is equivalent to $alpha$ is algebraic.
Your answer has helped me to see that if $F[alpha]$ is a field, then $alpha$ is algebraic. But I can't seem to prove the reciprocal.
– Nuntractatuses Amável
Nov 25 at 4:50
If $alpha$ is algebraic, write down its minimal polynomial, which has nonzero constant term. Can you find what is $alpha^{-1}$ from this?
– Eclipse Sun
Nov 25 at 16:46
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
Hint: $F[alpha]$ is a field if and only if $alpha^{-1}in F[alpha]$. Show that the latter is equivalent to $alpha$ is algebraic.
Your answer has helped me to see that if $F[alpha]$ is a field, then $alpha$ is algebraic. But I can't seem to prove the reciprocal.
– Nuntractatuses Amável
Nov 25 at 4:50
If $alpha$ is algebraic, write down its minimal polynomial, which has nonzero constant term. Can you find what is $alpha^{-1}$ from this?
– Eclipse Sun
Nov 25 at 16:46
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
Hint: $F[alpha]$ is a field if and only if $alpha^{-1}in F[alpha]$. Show that the latter is equivalent to $alpha$ is algebraic.
Hint: $F[alpha]$ is a field if and only if $alpha^{-1}in F[alpha]$. Show that the latter is equivalent to $alpha$ is algebraic.
answered Nov 25 at 4:07
Eclipse Sun
6,8371337
6,8371337
Your answer has helped me to see that if $F[alpha]$ is a field, then $alpha$ is algebraic. But I can't seem to prove the reciprocal.
– Nuntractatuses Amável
Nov 25 at 4:50
If $alpha$ is algebraic, write down its minimal polynomial, which has nonzero constant term. Can you find what is $alpha^{-1}$ from this?
– Eclipse Sun
Nov 25 at 16:46
add a comment |
Your answer has helped me to see that if $F[alpha]$ is a field, then $alpha$ is algebraic. But I can't seem to prove the reciprocal.
– Nuntractatuses Amável
Nov 25 at 4:50
If $alpha$ is algebraic, write down its minimal polynomial, which has nonzero constant term. Can you find what is $alpha^{-1}$ from this?
– Eclipse Sun
Nov 25 at 16:46
Your answer has helped me to see that if $F[alpha]$ is a field, then $alpha$ is algebraic. But I can't seem to prove the reciprocal.
– Nuntractatuses Amável
Nov 25 at 4:50
Your answer has helped me to see that if $F[alpha]$ is a field, then $alpha$ is algebraic. But I can't seem to prove the reciprocal.
– Nuntractatuses Amável
Nov 25 at 4:50
If $alpha$ is algebraic, write down its minimal polynomial, which has nonzero constant term. Can you find what is $alpha^{-1}$ from this?
– Eclipse Sun
Nov 25 at 16:46
If $alpha$ is algebraic, write down its minimal polynomial, which has nonzero constant term. Can you find what is $alpha^{-1}$ from this?
– Eclipse Sun
Nov 25 at 16:46
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
How about this for an answer?
Suppose that $F[alpha]$ is a field. Then, $alpha^{-1} in F[alpha]$, so there is a polynomial $g(x) in F[x]$ such that $g(alpha) = alpha^{-1}$. Then we have that $alpha g(alpha) = 1$, which implies that $alpha$ satisfies $xg(x) - 1 in F[x]$. So we have that $alpha$ is algebraic over $F$.
Conversely, let $p(x) in F[x]$ be the minimal polynomial (that is, the unique monic irreducible polynomial) such that $p(alpha) = 0$ and consider the evaluation map $phi: F[x] to E$ defined by $phi (f(x)) = f(alpha)$. Then we have $kerphi = {f(x) in F[x]: f(alpha) = 0} = langle p(x) rangle$. Because $p(x)$ is irreducible, $F[x]/langle p(x) rangle$ is a field and, by the isomorphism theorem, is isomorphic to $phi(F[x]) = {f(alpha): f(x) in F[x]}$, implying that the latter is a field.
Does it sound right?
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
How about this for an answer?
Suppose that $F[alpha]$ is a field. Then, $alpha^{-1} in F[alpha]$, so there is a polynomial $g(x) in F[x]$ such that $g(alpha) = alpha^{-1}$. Then we have that $alpha g(alpha) = 1$, which implies that $alpha$ satisfies $xg(x) - 1 in F[x]$. So we have that $alpha$ is algebraic over $F$.
Conversely, let $p(x) in F[x]$ be the minimal polynomial (that is, the unique monic irreducible polynomial) such that $p(alpha) = 0$ and consider the evaluation map $phi: F[x] to E$ defined by $phi (f(x)) = f(alpha)$. Then we have $kerphi = {f(x) in F[x]: f(alpha) = 0} = langle p(x) rangle$. Because $p(x)$ is irreducible, $F[x]/langle p(x) rangle$ is a field and, by the isomorphism theorem, is isomorphic to $phi(F[x]) = {f(alpha): f(x) in F[x]}$, implying that the latter is a field.
Does it sound right?
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
up vote
3
down vote
How about this for an answer?
Suppose that $F[alpha]$ is a field. Then, $alpha^{-1} in F[alpha]$, so there is a polynomial $g(x) in F[x]$ such that $g(alpha) = alpha^{-1}$. Then we have that $alpha g(alpha) = 1$, which implies that $alpha$ satisfies $xg(x) - 1 in F[x]$. So we have that $alpha$ is algebraic over $F$.
Conversely, let $p(x) in F[x]$ be the minimal polynomial (that is, the unique monic irreducible polynomial) such that $p(alpha) = 0$ and consider the evaluation map $phi: F[x] to E$ defined by $phi (f(x)) = f(alpha)$. Then we have $kerphi = {f(x) in F[x]: f(alpha) = 0} = langle p(x) rangle$. Because $p(x)$ is irreducible, $F[x]/langle p(x) rangle$ is a field and, by the isomorphism theorem, is isomorphic to $phi(F[x]) = {f(alpha): f(x) in F[x]}$, implying that the latter is a field.
Does it sound right?
How about this for an answer?
Suppose that $F[alpha]$ is a field. Then, $alpha^{-1} in F[alpha]$, so there is a polynomial $g(x) in F[x]$ such that $g(alpha) = alpha^{-1}$. Then we have that $alpha g(alpha) = 1$, which implies that $alpha$ satisfies $xg(x) - 1 in F[x]$. So we have that $alpha$ is algebraic over $F$.
Conversely, let $p(x) in F[x]$ be the minimal polynomial (that is, the unique monic irreducible polynomial) such that $p(alpha) = 0$ and consider the evaluation map $phi: F[x] to E$ defined by $phi (f(x)) = f(alpha)$. Then we have $kerphi = {f(x) in F[x]: f(alpha) = 0} = langle p(x) rangle$. Because $p(x)$ is irreducible, $F[x]/langle p(x) rangle$ is a field and, by the isomorphism theorem, is isomorphic to $phi(F[x]) = {f(alpha): f(x) in F[x]}$, implying that the latter is a field.
Does it sound right?
answered Nov 25 at 7:45
Nuntractatuses Amável
57212
57212
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
The theorem you want to use is Bézout's Lemma:
If $f, g in F[x]$ are coprime then there exists $lambda, mu in F[x]$ such that $$lambda f + mu g = 1. $$
Generally speaking, this is the theorem you should look for for finding inverses modulo something. For instance if $f(alpha) = 0$ then this gives
$$ mu(alpha) g(alpha) = 1. $$
Or if instead you looked at $F[x]/(f)$ then you get
$$ mu g equiv 1 pmod f $$
(These are related ideas.)
The other direction, Eclipse Sun already hinted at.
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
The theorem you want to use is Bézout's Lemma:
If $f, g in F[x]$ are coprime then there exists $lambda, mu in F[x]$ such that $$lambda f + mu g = 1. $$
Generally speaking, this is the theorem you should look for for finding inverses modulo something. For instance if $f(alpha) = 0$ then this gives
$$ mu(alpha) g(alpha) = 1. $$
Or if instead you looked at $F[x]/(f)$ then you get
$$ mu g equiv 1 pmod f $$
(These are related ideas.)
The other direction, Eclipse Sun already hinted at.
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
The theorem you want to use is Bézout's Lemma:
If $f, g in F[x]$ are coprime then there exists $lambda, mu in F[x]$ such that $$lambda f + mu g = 1. $$
Generally speaking, this is the theorem you should look for for finding inverses modulo something. For instance if $f(alpha) = 0$ then this gives
$$ mu(alpha) g(alpha) = 1. $$
Or if instead you looked at $F[x]/(f)$ then you get
$$ mu g equiv 1 pmod f $$
(These are related ideas.)
The other direction, Eclipse Sun already hinted at.
The theorem you want to use is Bézout's Lemma:
If $f, g in F[x]$ are coprime then there exists $lambda, mu in F[x]$ such that $$lambda f + mu g = 1. $$
Generally speaking, this is the theorem you should look for for finding inverses modulo something. For instance if $f(alpha) = 0$ then this gives
$$ mu(alpha) g(alpha) = 1. $$
Or if instead you looked at $F[x]/(f)$ then you get
$$ mu g equiv 1 pmod f $$
(These are related ideas.)
The other direction, Eclipse Sun already hinted at.
answered Nov 25 at 5:03
Trevor Gunn
13.9k32045
13.9k32045
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3012426%2fshow-that-f-alpha-f-alpha-fx-in-fx-is-a-field-iff-alpha-is%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown