CHAPTER 6

Field Extensions
Recall that all rings are commutative with identity, unless stated otherwise, and all ring homomor-
phisms A B are required to map 1
A
1
B
.
6.1. Linear Algebra
Let K be a eld. We need to observe that linear algebra works over K exactly as it does over R or
C.
1
6.1.1 Denition A K-vector space is an abelian group V together with map K V V called scalar
multiplication satisfying for all , K and v, w V
(a) 1 v = v
(b) ( v) = () v
(c) ( +) v = v + v
(d) (v +w) = v + w
Every K-vector space V has a basis.
2
The cardinality of any two bases for V are equal. The dimension
of V is the cardinality of any basis. Any set of linearly independent elements in V may be extended
to a basis for V . Etc.
After choosing a basis, a linear map of nite dimensional K-vector spaces is represented by a matrix
with entries in K. We can solve linear systems, dene determinants etc and all the standard properties
hold.
Below we use such results from linear algebra without further comment.
6.2. Field Extensions
In this section we consider the problem of constructing larger elds from smaller ones. We need a few
preliminary results.
6.2.1 Theorem If f : K R is a homomorphism from a eld K to a ring R ,= 0 then f is injective.
Proof The kernel of f is not all of K since f(1
K
) = 1
R
,= 0
R
is not the zero map. So ker f does not
contain any units in K by Theorem 4.9.1. But every non-zero element of K is a unit, so ker f = 0.
Hence K is isomorphic to a subring of R, and we may consider K as inside R.
6.2.2 Denition If K and L are elds with K L we say that L is a eld extension of K.
6.2.3 Example R is a eld extension of Q and C is a eld extension of R.
1
We do not have an inner (dot) product in general.
2
This is a consequence of the Axiom of Choice.
83
6.2. FIELD EXTENSIONS 4301 Notes
The main tool in constructing eld extensions is Corollary 5.1.11: If K is a eld and f K[x] is
irreducible then K[x]/f) is also a eld. This gives a method of constructing many new elds.
6.2.4 Example x
2
+1 is irreducible in R[x] since it has no real roots. By Corollary 5.1.11 L = R[x]/x
2
+1)
is a eld. The elements of L have the form f(x) + x
2
+ 1), where f(x) R[x]. We have obvious
homomorphism R L sending a to a + x
2
+ 1). This is not the zero map, so it is injective by
Theorem 6.2.1, so we have (an isomorphic copy of) R inside L, namely R a+x
2
+1) [ a R L.
So L is a real vector space, with scalar multiplication
a
_
f(x) +x
2
+ 1)
_
=
_
a +x
2
+ 1)
__
f(x) +x
2
+ 1)
_
= af(x) +x
2
+ 1).
Let f(x) +x
2
+1) L. By the Division Algorithm we can write f = q(x)(x
2
+1) +a +bx for some
q(x) R[x] and a, b R. But
_
q(x)(x
2
+ 1) +a +bx
_
+x
2
+ 1) = a +bx +x
2
+ 1),
so L =
_
(a +bx) +x
2
+ 1) [ a, b R
_
.
Let 1
L
= 1 +x
2
+ 1) and i
L
= x +x
2
+ 1). Then
i
2
L
=
_
x +x
2
+ 1)
__
x +x
2
+ 1)
_
= x
2
+x
2
+ 1)
= 1 +x
2
+ 1) = 1
L
.
So
L =
_
a 1
L
+b i
L
[ a, b R, i
2
L
= 1
L
_
C.
We have constructed C (and shown it is a eld containing R) without using any prior knowledge that
such a eld exists.
In this example we started with a eld (R) and adjoined a root of an irreducible polynomial (x
2
+1)
to obtain a larger eld (C). We can do this without prior knowledge that a larger eld containing
this root actually exists. That is, we can construct the larger eld starting from the smaller.
6.2.5 Theorem [Kronecker] Let K be a eld, and let f K[x] be an irreducible polynomial of degree
n. Let L = K[x]/f(x)).
(a) L is a eld containing (an isomorphic copy of) K
(b) f(x) has a root in L.
(c) Every element of L can be written uniquely in the form a
0
+a
1
+ +a
n1

n1
with the
a
i
K.
(d) L is an n-dimensional K-vector space.
Note: even if f(x) is reducible we may pick an irreducible factor g(x) and apply Kroneckers con-
struction, so we can always nd a eld extension of K containing a root of any non-constant f(x).
Proof (a) L is a eld by Corollary 5.1.11. Note that f) is proper (Theorem 5.1.10) so 1 , f).
We have natural homomorphisms K K[x] K[x]/f) = L and the composite map is not zero
because 1 1 1 + f) , = 0. By Theorem 6.2.1 K is (isomorphic to) a subeld of L. (That is,
we identify a K with a + f) L). Thus L is a also a K-vector space with scalar multiplication
a(g(x) +f)) = a g(x) +f).
84
CHAPTER 6. FIELD EXTENSIONS 4301 Notes
(b) Let = x +f) L. Consider any polynomial
3
g =

c
i
t
i
L[t]. Evaluating g at gives
g() =

c
i

i
=

c
i
(x +f))
i
=

c
i
x
i
+f) = g(x) +f).
In particular evaluating f at gives f() = f(x) + f) = 0, so the polynomial f has a root in L.
Indeed, g() = 0 i g(x) f) i f [ g.
(c) & (d) Let S = 1, , . . . ,
n1
. We show that S is a basis of L as a K-vector space. Every
element in L can be written in the form g(x) + f) where g K[x]. Use the division algorithm to
write g(x) = q(x)f(x) +r(x) with r(x) = a
0
+a
1
x + +a
n1
x
n1
where n = deg f(x). Then
g(x) +f) = q(x)f(x) +r(x) +f)
= r(x) +f)
= a
0
+a
1
x + +a
n1
x
n1
+f)
= a
0
(1 +f)) +a
1
(x +f)) + +a
n1
(x +f))
n1
= a
0
+a
1
+ +a
n1

n1
So S spans L as a K-vector space.
Uniqueness: If some linear combination
b
0
+b
1
+ +b
n1

n1
= 0 L
with b
i
K, let h = b
0
+b
1
x + +b
n1
x
n1
. Then h() = 0 so f [ h (see the last sentence of (2)).
If h ,= 0 this is a contradiction because deg h < deg f, so h is the zero polynomial, so all the b
i
= 0.
Thus S is also K-linearly independent, so L is an n-dimensional K-vector space.
6.2.6 Denition We say that L is obtained from K by adjoining a root of f, and write L = K().
It should be remembered that historically the existence of a eld containing

2 came as a shock to the

Pythagoreans, and Greek mathematics never incorporated
3

2 completely successfully. The existence

of a eld extension of R containing i was controversial for many years (hence the name imaginary
number). Kroneckers Theorem puts the existence of such elds on a rigorous basis.
106 Exercise We cannot just introduce new elements into a ring willy-nilly. Let R be a non-zero ring with
identity. Introduce a new element such that 0
1
= . Show that this leads to a contradiction
(this is Exercise 60 again).
6.2.7 Example
R(i) = a + bi [ a, b R = C. This is obtained as R[x]/x
2
+ 1) where x
2
+ 1 is a degree 2
irreducible real polynomial, and C is a 2 dimensional real vector space.
Q(i) = a +bi [ a, b Q obtained as Q[x]/x
2
+ 1).
Q(

2) = a +b

2 [ a, b Q = Q[x]/x
2
2). It is not so obvious that this is a eld, but the
theorem shows it is. For example, 1/(1 +

2) = 1 +

2.
Q(
3

2) = a +b
3

2 +c(
3

2)
2
[ a, b, c Q.
Check that x
3
3x 1 is irreducible over Q. (There is no rational root.) Thus we may form
Q() = a+b+c
2
[ a, b, c Q where
3
31 = 0. For example, we simplify
4
+2
3
+3:

4
+ 2
3
+ 3 = ( + 2)(
3
3 1) + (3
2
+ 7 + 5) = (3
2
+ 7 + 5).
3
We cannot say g L[x] because x already occurs in the construction of L, so we use a dierent indeterminate t
85
6.2. FIELD EXTENSIONS 4301 Notes
107 Exercise Simplify 1/(
4
+2
3
+3) in the last example. Hint: gcd(3x
2
+7x+5, x
3
3x1) = 1 since
x
3
3x1 is irreducible. Use Euclids algorithm to write 1 = (x
3
3x1)g(x) +(3x
2
+7x+5)h(x).
Or just solve (3
2
+ 7 + 5)h() = 1 for unknown quadratic h, using the relations for
3
,
4
.
Suppose L is a nite eld. Then char L is not 0, so must be p for some prime p, so F
p
L. Thus L
is a vector space over the eld F
p
. Since L is nite as a set it is clearly nite dimensional over F
p
(it
cannot have an innite basis!) Suppose x
1
, . . . , x
n
is a basis for L over F
p
. Then every element of
L may be written uniquely in the form

1
x
1
+ +
n
x
n
,
i
F
p
.
There are p choices for each of the
i
, so L has exactly p
n
elements. In summary: every nite eld
has p
n
elements for some prime p. In fact more is true:
6.2.8 Theorem Let K be a nite eld.
(a) K has p
n
elements for some prime p and n 1.
(b) For each p and n there exists exactly one nite eld (up to isomorphism) of order p
n
.
Proof (a) Above. (b) Later.
In general the unique nite eld with q = p
n
elements is often denoted F
q
. Finite elds are extremely
useful in cryptography, coding, combinatorics etc.
6.2.9 Example Let f = x
2
+ x + 1. This is irreducible over F
2
because 0 and 1 are not roots of f. Thus
we can form L = F
2
() where is a root of f. By Kroneckers Theorem L = 0, 1, , +1, and this
is a eld with 4 elements. Indeed, since
2
++1 = 0 in L and char L = 2 we have
2
= +1. Thus
(+1) =
2
+ = +1+ = 1 and (+1)
2
=
2
+1 = . So we have addition and multiplication
tables
+ 0 1 + 1
0 0 1 + 1
1 1 0 + 1
+ 1 0 1
+ 1 + 1 1 0
0 1 + 1
0 0 0 0 0
1 0 1 + 1
0 + 1 1
+ 1 0 + 1 1
According to Kroneckers Theorem, every element of L can be written as 0, 1, or +1. For example
we simplify z = ( + 1)/(
3
+ + 1). First,
3
= (
2
) = ( + 1) =
2
+ = + 1 + = 1 so
(
3
++1)
1
= (1++1)
1
=
1
= +1 from the multiplication table. So z = (+1)(+1) = .
Note that L has four elements but is not the same as Z/4Z, which is not even an integral domain.
6.2.10 Example The polynomial x
2
+ 1 is irreducible in F
3
[x] since 1 is not a square mod 3, so we
can can form L = F
3
(i), where i is a root of x
2
+ 1. So L = a + bi [ a, b F
3
with i
2
= 1.
Here L is a 2 dimensional F
3
vector space with basis 1, i and 3
2
= 9 elements altogether: L =
0, 1, 2, i, 1 +i, 2 +i, 2i, 1 + 2i, 2 + 2i. Note that L , Z/9Z.
108 Exercise Construct a nite eld with 8 elements, and one with 27 elements.
86
CHAPTER 6. FIELD EXTENSIONS 4301 Notes
109 Exercise Write down all polynomials of exact degree 3 over F
2
. How many dierent rings F
2
[x]/f)
can we form (up to isomorphism)? Which of these rings are elds? Explain.
6.3. Field Extensions and Degree
One of the main objects of study in Galois theory is a smaller eld K inside a larger eld L.
6.3.1 Denition Let K L be elds. We say that L is an extension of K, and write L/K is an extension.
A tower of elds is a series of eld extensions K
1
/K
2
, K
2
/K
3
, . . . , K
n1
/K
n
.
6.3.2 Denition A eld extension L/K is simple if L is generated over K by a single element of K, ie if
L = K().
6.3.3 Example C is a eld extension of R and R is an extension of Q. Indeed C is a simple extension of R
since C = R[i]. But R is not a simple extension of Q (exercise).
110 Exercise Prove that R is not a simple extension of Q. Hint: prove that a simple extension of Q is a
countable set. One way is by mapping into the countable ring Q[x] Q[y].
Sometimes it is useful to broaden the denition of eld extension. If K
1
K
2
and K
2
L we may
want to view L as a eld extension of K
1
. There is an elegant way to do this:
6.3.4 Theorem Any homomorphism of elds K L is injective.
Proof A (ring) homomorphism f : K L must map 1
K
to 1
L
hence is not the 0 map. So ker f ,= K.
But the only other ideal of the eld K is 0, so ker f = 0 and f is injective.
This means that K f(K) L so K is isomorphic to a subeld of L. Since we often do not
distinguish between isomorphic objects, we can view K as being inside L. From this point of view,
any homomorphism K L gives rise to a eld extension of L over (an isomorphic copy of) K. For
example, if K L then the inclusion homomorphism is such an f.
6.3.5 Theorem Every eld is an extension of F
p
for some p or of Q.
Proof Every char p eld contains (an isomorphic copy of) F
p
, and every char 0 eld contains (an
isomorphic copy of) Q.
We can measure the size of the eld extension as follows. If L/K is a eld extension then (L, +) is
an abelian group and we can multiply elements of L by scalars from K (using the multiplication
within L). This makes L into a vector space over K. (Viewing L just as a vector space throws away
information. Nonetheless, it is still useful.)
6.3.6 Denition Let L/K be a eld extension. If L is a nite dimensional K-vector space we say that L
is a nite extension of K. In this case the degree of the extension, denoted [L: K], is the dimension
of L considered as a K-vector space.
6.3.7 Example C is a eld extension of R. Considered as a real vector space, C is 2 dimensional, with
basis 1, i. So C is a nite extension of R with [C: R] = 2.
6.3.8 Example Q(t) is a simple extension of Q. So as a eld it is generated over Q by 1 and t. But it is
not a nite extension of Q ie it is not generated by a nite set as a vector space.
Proof If S is any nite subset of Q(t) then there is a highest power of t, say t
N
, occurring among
all the terms in S. Then t
N+1
is not in the span of S over Q (consisting of all linear combinations
87
6.4. ALGEBRAIC EXTENSIONS 4301 Notes
of elements of S with coecients in Q). We are not allowed to multiply basis elements when we take
the span, only add and multiply by scalars.
6.3.9 Theorem Let F/L/K be a tower
of elds. Then F/K is nite i F/L
and L/K are both nite, and in this
case [F : L] [L: K] = [F : K].
[F : L]
_
_
_
F
[
L
[L: K]
_
[
K
_

_
[F : K]
Proof = Suppose F/K is nite. Since L is a subspace of F and [F : K] < , [L: K] < also.
Any set that spans F over K will also span F over L so [F : L] < also.
= Let [L: K] = m, [F : L] = n. We must show that [F : K] = mn. Let u
1
, . . . , u
n
be a basis
for F over L, and let v
1
, . . . , v
m
be a basis for L over K. We show that u
i
v
j
with 1 i n,
1 j m forms a basis for F over K.
Span: Let x F. We can write x =

i
u
i
with
i
L. We can in turn write
i
=

i,j
v
j
with

i,j
K. Altogether we have x =

i,j

i,j
u
i
v
j
.
Independent: Suppose

i,j
u
i
v
j
= 0 with
i,j
K. Let
i
=

j

i,j
v
j
for each i. Then
i
L and

i
u
i
= 0. Since the u
i
are linearly independent over L, each
i
= 0. Thus

j

i,j
v
j
= 0. But the
v
j
are linearly independent over K, so each
i,j
= 0.
Note that linear independence implies u
i
v
j
consists of mn distinct elements.
The proof actually gives a basis: u
i
v
j
.
6.3.10 Example If [F : K] = p is a prime number then there are no elds L with between K L F.
Proof p = [F : K] = [F : L][L: K] so either [L: K] = 1 or [F : L] = 1 so F = L or L = K.
111 Exercise Let L/K be a eld extension. Suppose K contains a
2
[ a L and char K ,= 2. Prove that
K = L. Hint: Consider (a +b)
2
. Is the statement true in characteristic 2? Explain.
6.4. Algebraic Extensions
6.4.1 Denition Let L/K be a eld extension. An element L is algebraic over K if there exists
polynomial f K[x] with f() = 0. We say that L is algebraic over K or an algebraic extension if
every element of L is algebraic over K. An element of L that is not algebraic over K is said to be
transcendental over K.
6.4.2 Example
C/Q is a eld extension, and

2 C is algebraic since it satises x

2
2 = 0. It is a non-trivial
theorem that e is transcendental over Q (see 6.12). Thus C is not an algebraic extension of Q.
The rational function eld Q(t) is a simple extension of Q, but t does not satisfy any polynomial
over Q, so t is a transcendental element.
Suppose L/K is an extension and L is algebraic. Then may be a root of many polynomials.
Eg

2 satises x
2
2, but also 2x
3
+2x
2
4x4 (exercise). Note that if f() = 0 then we can divide
f by its leading coecient to achieve a monic polynomial
4
g with g() = 0.
4
That is, the coecient of the highest degree term is 1.
88
CHAPTER 6. FIELD EXTENSIONS 4301 Notes
6.4.3 Denition Suppose L/K is an extension and L is algebraic. A minimum polynomial of is a
monic polynomial f K[x] 0 with f() = 0 and f of minimal degree. The degree of a minimum
polynomial is called the degree of .
Note that if has minimum polynomial f then there is no non-zero polynomial g (monic or not) with
g() = 0 and deg g < deg f. In particular, the minimum polynomial is unique.
6.4.4 Example

2 C has degree 2 over Q with a minimum polynomial x

2
2. (It cannot satisfy a degree
1 polynomial, otherwise it would be rational.)
112 Exercise Show that L has degree 1 i K.
6.4.5 Theorem Suppose L/K is an extension and L is algebraic with a minimum polynomial f.
Then:
(a) f is irreducible.
(b) Let g K[x]. Then g() = 0 i f [ g.
Proof (a) If f = gh in K[x] with 1 deg g, deg h < deg f then 0 = f() = g()h() so g or h is a
polynomial with as a root and smaller degree than f, contradiction.
(b) = Write g = qf + r with deg r < deg f. Evaluating each side at we see r() = 0. By
minimality of deg f, r must be the zero polynomial.
= Clear.
A simple algebraic extension has a nice description. For a more general statement see Theorem 6.6.3.
6.4.6 Theorem Suppose L/K is a eld extension and L is algebraic over K with minimum polynomial
f of degree n. Consider K() L. Then:
(a) K[] = K() K[x]/f)
(b) Every element of K() may be written uniquely in the form

n1
i=0
c
i

i
for some c
i
K.
(c) [K(): K] = n.
Proof (a) Consider the evaluation homomorphism : K[x] K[] given by (g) = g(). This is a
surjective map. And g ker i g() = 0 i g f) by Theorem 6.4.5. So the First Isomorphism
Theorem gives
K[x]
f)
K[] K().
Now K() is the smallest subeld of L containing K and . However since f is irreducible, K[x]/f)
is a eld so K[] is actually a eld. It obviously contains K and so it contains all of K(). Hence
K() = K[].
(b) Let h K(). Since K() = K[] by (a), there exists g K[x] with (g) = h. By the
division algorithm there exist q, r K[x] with g = fq + r and r = 0 or deg r < n = deg f. Then
h = (g) = g() = r(). Let r =

n1
i=0
c
i
x
i
. Then h = r() has the required form.
Uniqueness: Suppose

n1
i=0
a
i

i
=

n1
i=0
b
i

i
. Then

n1
i=0
(a
i
b
i
)
i
= 0, so

n1
i=0
(a
i
b
i
)x
i
ker ,
so is a multiple of f. But it is of lower degree than f, so must be the zero polynomial. Hence all the
a
i
= b
i
.
(c) Follows immediately from (b) since 1, , . . . ,
n1
is a basis for K() over K.
89
6.5. THE ISOMORPHISM EXTENSION THEOREM 4301 Notes
6.4.7 Example
R(i) = R[i] = a +bi [ a, b R = C. The minimum polynomial of i is x
2
+ 1 of degree 2, and
[C: R] = 2.
Q(i) = a +bi [ a, b Q.
Q(

2) = a + b

2 [ a, b Q. The theorem shows the rhs is actually a eld. For example,

1/(1 +

2) = 1 +

2.
Q(
3

2) = a +b
3

2 +c(
3

2)
2
[ a, b, c Q.
Check that x
3
3x 1 is irreducible over Q. (There is no rational root.) Thus we may form
Q() = a +b +c
2
[ a, b, c Q where
3
3 1 = 0.
113 Exercise Simplify 1/(
4
+2
3
+3) in the last example. Hint: gcd(3x
2
+7x+5, x
3
3x1) = 1 since
x
3
3x1 is irreducible. Use Euclids algorithm to write 1 = (x
3
3x1)g(x) +(3x
2
+7x+5)h(x).
Or just solve (3
2
+ 7 + 5)h() = 1 for unknown quadratic h, using the relations for
3
,
4
.
So far we have considered eld extensions such as Q(i) taking place inside some pre-existing larger
eld, such as C. In general we would like to start with a eld K and adjoin extra elements to obtain
a larger eld. We can do this even without knowing before hand that a larger eld exists containing
these new elements. That is, we can construct the larger eld starting from K. Indeed Theorem 6.4.6
does this.
6.4.8 Corollary [Kronecker] Let K be a eld, and let f K[x] be an irreducible polynomial. Let
L = K[x]/f). Then L is a eld extension of K containing a root of f, and indeed L = K() (that
is, the eld generated by K and inside L is all of L).
Proof We proved in Theorem 6.4.6(a) that L is a eld, and the homomorphism K K[x]
K[x]/f) shows that L/K is a eld extension. Let = x + f) L. If g =

c
i
t
i
L[t] then
evaluating g at gives

c
i

i
=

c
i
(x +f))
i
=

c
i
x
i
+f) = g(x) +f). In particular evaluating
f at gives f() = f(x) +f) = 0. Finally every element in L can be written in the form g(x) +f)
and hence is g() for some g K[x], so L is generated by K and .
6.4.9 Denition We say that L is obtained from K by adjoining a root of f, and write L = K() (or
L = K[] by Theorem 6.4.6).
Note: if f non-constant then we may pick an irreducible factor g of f and apply Kroneckers con-
struction, so we can always nd a eld containing a root of f (even if f is reducible).
6.5. The Isomorphism Extension Theorem
Kroneckers result allows us to extend elds. In this section we consider extending the maps between
elds. Theorem 6.5.3 is absolutely fundamental.
First we have the obvious:
6.5.1 Theorem Suppose : K
1
K
2
is an isomorphism of elds. Then the map : K
1
[x] K
2
[x] dened
by

a
i
x
i
_
=

(a
i
)x
i
is an isomorphism of rings extending (ie with [
K
1
= ).
Proof Easy exercise.
90
CHAPTER 6. FIELD EXTENSIONS 4301 Notes
Now suppose L
1
/K
1
and L
2
/K
2
are eld extensions and there is an isomorphism : K
1
K
2
. Under
what conditions will there be an isomorphism : L
1
L
2
extending ?
L
1

//
L
2
K
1

//
OO
K
2
OO
6.5.2 Example There is no isomorphism extending the identity map in the following diagram:
Q(

2)

//
Q(

3)
Q
=
//
OO
Q
OO
Proof Suppose : Q(

2) Q(

3) with (q) = q for all q Q. Then 0 = (0) = (

2
2
2) =
(

2 )
2
(2) = (

2)
2
2. Thus (

2) =

2, but this is not an element of Q(

3).
Thus we must impose the restriction that maps roots of polynomials to corresponding roots. For
simple algebraic extensions, then always exists:
6.5.3 Theorem [Isomorphism Extension, Simple Extensions] Suppose : K
1
K
2
is an isomor-
phism, L
1
= K
1
(
1
) and L
2
= K
2
(
2
). Suppose
1
is algebraic over K
1
with minimal polynomial
f K
1
[x]. If
2
is a root of (f) then extends to a unique isomorphism K
1
(
1
) K
2
(
2
) that
maps
1
to
2
.
Proof Since is an isomorphism and f is monic and irreducible, so is (f). But it has
2
as a
root, so it must be the minimum polynomial of
2
. By Kroneckers Theorem, K
1
[x]/f) K(
1
) and
similarly there is an isomorphism : K
2
(
2
) K
2
[x]/(f)).
The map : K
1
[x] K
2
[x] induces an isomorphism K
1
[x]/f) K
2
[x]/(f)). Altogether we get:
K
1
(
1
)
//
K
1
[x]
f

//
K
2
[x]
(f)

1
//
K
2
(
2
)
a K
1

//
a +f)

//
(a) +(f))

//
(a)

1

//
x +f)

//
x +(f))

//

2
Uniqueness: if
1
,
2
are two such extensions, they agree on K and also at
1
and hence on every
expression

a
i

i
1
with a
i
K
1
. Thus they agree on all of L
1
by Theorem 6.4.6.
6.5.4 Example Consider the diagram
C

//
C
R
=
//
OO
R
OO
Here C = R(i) and i has minimum polynomial x
2
+ 1. The map and hence is just the identity.
Thu there are unique isomorphisms C C xing each real number and mapping i to a root of x
2
+1
ie mapping a +bi a bi. These are the identity map C C, and the complex conjugation map.
91
6.6. TOWER LAWS 4301 Notes
6.6. Tower Laws
We show that if F/L and L/K both possess some important properties, so does F/K.
6.6.1 Theorem Finite = algebraic: If L/K is nite extension of elds, then it is an algebraic extension.
Proof Assume L/K is a nite extension. Let L. The set 1, ,
2
, . . . cannot be linearly
independent, so there must be some non-trivial linear relation a
0
+a
1
+ +a
n

n
= 0.
6.6.2 Example If is algebraic over K, then [K(): K] is nite by Theorem 6.4.6, so K()/K is algebraic.
This is not immediately obvious. Eg if satises f K[x], what polynomial does 7
3
1/(3 +2)
K() satisfy?
The converse of Theorem 6.6.1 is false.: L could have innitely many K-linearly independent algebraic
elements. See 6.9. However if L only requires nitely many algebraic generators over K then the
converse of Theorem 6.6.1 is true.
6.6.3 Theorem Let L/K be a eld extension. Suppose L = K(
1
, . . . ,
n
) where all the
i
are algebraic
over K. Then L = K[
1
, . . . ,
n
] and L/K is a nite extension with
[L: K]

[K(
i
): K].
In particular, L is algebraic over K.
Proof Induction on n. If n = 1 the result follows by Theorem 6.4.6. Let F = K[
1
, . . . ,
n1
]. Then
F = K(
1
, . . . ,
n1
) by inductive hypothesis. Also L = F(
n
). Now
n
is algebraic over K hence
over F and so L = F[
n
] by Theorem 6.4.6.
Now [L: F] is the degree of the minimum polynomial of
n
over F, which is the degree [K(
n
): K]
of the minimum polynomial of
n
over K. Thus
[L: K] = [L: F][F : K] [K(
n
): K][F : K]
and the inequality follows by induction. Finally L/K is algebraic by Theorem 6.6.1.
6.6.4 Example Let K = Q(

2) and L = K(

3). Claim: x
2
3 K[x] is irreducible. (It is obvious that
x
2
3 is irreducible in Q[x], but we must show it does not factor in the larger ring K[x].)
Proof If not then x
2
3 has a root in K[x], so

3 K so

3 = a+b

2 for some a, b Q. Squaring

gives

2 Q, contradiction.
Hence [L: Q] = [L: K] [K: Q] = 2 2 = 4. A basis for L/Q is 1,

2,

3,

6 by the proof of
Theorem 6.3.9.
114 Exercise Show that Q(

2,

3) = Q(

2 +

3).
The inequality in Theorem 6.6.3 can be strict if the
i
are algebraically related.
6.6.5 Example Let =
4

2, =
4

18. Then [Q(): Q] = [Q(): Q] = 4. But (/)

2
= 3 so satises
x
2
3
2
= x
2
3

2, a polynomial in Q()[x], so [Q(, ): Q()] 2 and [Q(, ): Q] 8.

We have equality in Theorem 6.6.3 if all the [K(
i
): K] are pairwise relatively prime.
6.6.6 Theorem If , are algebraic over K with [K(): K] = m, [K(): K] = n and gcd(m, n) = 1
then [K(, ): K] = mn. Similarly for [K(
1
, . . . ,
n
): K], provided all the [K(
i
): K] are pairwise
relatively prime.
92
CHAPTER 6. FIELD EXTENSIONS 4301 Notes
Proof From Theorem 6.3.9 [K(, ): K] = [K(, ): K()] [K(): K] so n [ [K(, ): K]. Sim-
ilarly m [ [K(, ): K]. Since gcd(m, n) = 1 we have mn [ [K(, ): K]. But [K(, ): K]
[K(): K][K(): K)] = mn by Theorem 6.6.3. So we must have [K(, ): K] = mn. The case with
n terms
i
then follows by induction.
6.6.7 Example Let be a complex cube root of 1. Then [Q(
3

2, ): Q] = 6.
Proof The number satises the cyclotomic polynomial (x
3
1)/(x1) = 1+x+x
2
, so [Q(): Q] = 2
(not 3). Now use Theorem 6.6.6.
The property of being algebraic satises the same sort of transitivity theorem as the property of
being nite. We give a non-constructive proof below. An alternative is to use the resultant to give a
constructive proof.
6.6.8 Theorem If F/L/K is a tower of elds then F/K is algebraic i F/L and L/K are both algebraic.
Proof = If F/K is algebraic then every element of F satises a polynomial in K[x]. Hence every
element of F satises a polynomial in L[x], and every element in L satises a polynomial in K[x].
= This is more tricky. Let F and let f = a
0
+a
1
x+ +x
n
L[x] be its minimum polynomial
over L. Since L/K is algebraic each a
i
is algebraic over K, so M = K(a
0
, a
1
, . . . , a
n1
) is a nite
extension of K by Theorem 6.6.3. Similarly is algebraic over M by construction, so M()/M is
nite. Thus [M(): K] is nite (Theorem 6.3.9) and hence K()/K is nite. So by Theorem 6.6.1,
is algebraic over K. Since F was arbitrary, we are done.
6.6.9 Corollary Suppose L/K is a eld extension and , L are algebraic over K. Then so are ,
and 1/ (provided ,= 0).
Proof K(, )/K() and K()/K are algebraic (because they are nite; see Example 6.6.2). Thus
K(, ) is algebraic over K, and it contains all the listed elements.
6.7. StraightEdge and Compass Constructions
The formal study of mathematics began with the Ancient Greeks. Lacking modern algebraic notation,
they were largely interested in Euclidean geometry. The only tools they used were a compass and a
straightedge (a ruler without any distance markings). Euclid gives many constructions that can be
performed using these instruments: constructing parallel lines, bisecting an angle, diving a given line
into n equal parts, constructing a regular pentagon, given a polygon constructing a square with the
same area, and so on. However Greek mathematicians were unable to nd constructions to: trisect
a given angle, duplicate the cube (given a cube, construct a cube with twice the volume), square
the circle (given a circle, construct a square with the same area), construct a regular n-gon for
n = 7, 9, 11, 13 . . ..
These ancient problems all turn out to be impossible. To prove this, we must formalize straightedge
and compass constructions algebraically.
Initially we can construct the points (0, 0) and (1, 0): this just corresponds to choosing an origin and
a scale. If we have constructed points P and Q then we can:
(a) Construct the line segment PQ.
(b) Construct the circle with centre P, passing through Q.
93
6.7. STRAIGHTEDGE AND COMPASS CONSTRUCTIONS 4301 Notes
Any point formed as the intersection of such lines and circles is added to our set of constructible
points. We say that a point is constructible if it can be found using a nite sequence of the above
two operations. A number R is said to be constructible if we can construct two points P and Q
distance [[ apart. An angle is constructible if we can construct two lines meeting in an angle .
6.7.1 Example Starting with (0, 0) and (1, 0), draw the line connecting them (the x axis). Now draw a
circle C
1
centre (0, 1) passing through (0, 0). This cuts the x-axis again at (2, 0). Draw the circle C
0
centre (0, 0) passing through (2, 0), and the centre C
2
(2, 0) passing through (0, 0). Then C
0
and C
2
intersect at (1,

3). So we can draw the line x = 1. This constructs a perpendicular to a given line
(the x-axis) through a given point (1, 0).
Now C
1
intersects x = 1 at (1, 1). The distance from (0, 0) to (1, 1) gives us

2, so we have constructed
an irrational number. Etc.
This example may be generalized to construct a perpendicular to a given line through a given point.
Or given a point o a line, to draw the perpendicular from the point to the line.
6.7.2 Theorem The following are equivalent:
(a) The angle is constructible.
(b) cos is constructible.
(c) sin is constructible.
Proof [Sketch] (a) = (b) & (c) Given angle = LOR, construct unit circle centre O, meeting
OL at P and OR at Q. Drop a perpendicular from P meeting OR at T. Then PT = sin and
OT = cos .
For the other direction of proof, perform the construction in the reverse order.
6.7.3 Theorem If and R are constructible, so are +, , and / (provided ,= 0).
Proof Exercise in Euclidean geometry. To construct , draw a right angled triangle with sides 1,
and hypoteneuse

1 +
2
, then extend the side length 1 to length . By similar triangles the new
triangle has a side of length . Do this in reverse to get /.
115 Exercise Give a careful proof of this theorem.
6.7.4 Corollary The set of constructible numbers form a eld.
Furthermore using Pythagoras we have the following:
6.7.5 Theorem If 0 is constructible, so is

.
Proof Exercise. Hint: use Pythagoras and ( 1)
2
+ (2

)
2
= ( + 1)
2
.
116 Exercise Give the proof.
Let be the eld of constructible numbers. We know Q R. Since

2 (Example 6.7.1),
,= Q. Most Greek mathematics takes place in . It was their attempt to dene a suciently large
eld to have good mathematical properties. Unfortunately is much smaller than R as the following
results show. Without addressing this fundamental problem, the Greeks could not develop calculus
(and indeed, could not solve many problems in Euclidean geometry as mentioned earlier).
94
CHAPTER 6. FIELD EXTENSIONS 4301 Notes
6.7.6 Denition Let K be a subeld of R. The K-plane is K K R R. A K-line is a set of points
(x, y) in the K-plane K K satisfying
ax +by +c = 0, a, b, c K.
A K-circle is a set of points (x, y) in the K-plane with centre a point in K and radius an element of
K. That is, it is the set of all (x, y) in the K-plane satisfying
(x a)
2
+ (y b)
2
= c
2
, a, b, c K.
6.7.7 Theorem Let K be a subeld of R. The intersection of two K-lines, two K-circles or a K-line and
a K-circle will consist of points in the K-plane or in an L-plane where L = K(

a ) for some a K.
Proof [Sketch] To nd the intersection we have to set two linear/quadratic equations equal to an-
other. This gives at worst quadratic = 0 and we can use the quadratic formula.
6.7.8 Corollary If P is a constructible point then the coordinates of P lie in a eld Q(

a
1
, . . . ,

a
m
) R
where each a
i
Q(

a
1
, . . . ,

a
i1
).
Proof Starting from points with coordinates in Q, P is obtained by a nite sequence of operations
which, at each stage, introduce at most a quadratic extension.
6.7.9 Theorem A number is constructible i it is contained in a eld of the form Q(

a
1
, . . . ,

a
m
) R
where each a
i
Q(

a
1
, . . . ,

a
i1
).
Proof = Suppose is constructible. Then there exist P and Q constructible points with distance
PQ = . According to Corollary 6.7.8 the coordinates of P lie in K = Q(

a
1
, . . . ,

a
m
) and those of
Q lie in L = Q(

b
1
, . . . ,

b
n
) so both lie in F = KL = Q(

a
1
, . . . ,

a
m
,

b
1
, . . .

b
n
). Then lies
in F or a quadratic extension of F (by Pythagoras).
= Induction on m. Every element of Qis constructible. Suppose every element of K = Q(

a
1
, . . . ,

a
m1
)
(a eld of the form described) is constructible. Let Q(

a
1
, . . . ,

a
m
) where a
m
K. Then
K(

a
m
), so = a + b

a
m
with a, b, a
m
K. Then a, b, a
m
are constructible by inductive
hypothesis, so is constructible by Theorems 6.7.3 and 6.7.5.
6.7.10 Corollary If is constructible then is algebraic over Q, and [Q(): Q] is a power of 2.
Proof Let K = Q(

a
1
, . . . ,

a
m
). Then
[K: Q] = [Q(

a
1
, . . . ,

a
m
): Q(

a
1
, . . . ,

a
m1
)] [Q(

a
1
, . . . ,

a
m1
): Q(

a
1
, . . . ,

a
m2
)] [Q(

1
): Q
= 2 2 2
Hence [K: Q] is a power of 2. But Q() is a subeld of K, so [Q(): Q] [ [K: Q] so is also a power
of 2.
We now prove that the classical geometric problems mentioned earlier have no solution.
6.7.11 Theorem It is impossible to duplicate the cube using straightedge and compass.
Proof The problem is to construct a cube of volume 2. This means constructing the number =
3

2.
But the minimum polynomial of is f(x) = x
3
2. Thus [Q(): Q] = 3 so is not constructible.
6.7.12 Theorem It is impossible to square the circle using straightedge and compass.
Proof This means constructing a square with the same area as the unit circle, ie, constructing the
length =

. But is known to be transcendental over Q, not algebraic, so this is impossible.

95
6.7. STRAIGHTEDGE AND COMPASS CONSTRUCTIONS 4301 Notes
(In 6.12 we show that e is transcendental. We omit the proof that

is transcendental: the proof
is somewhat harder than the proof for e, but not much more illuminating.)
117 Exercise Show that

is transcendental i is.
118 Exercise Show that it is possible to bisect any given angle. Approach 1: give an explicit construction.
Method 2: argue algebraically based on the identity cos

2
=
_
1+cos
2
.
6.7.13 Theorem It is not possible to trisect an arbitrary angle using straightedge and compass.
Proof We show that it is impossible to trisect the angle = 60

. Since cos = 1/2, angle is

constructible (this amounts to constructing an equilateral triangle). Let = /3. From trigonometry
we know
1
2
= cos 3 = 4 cos
3
3 cos .
Put y = 2 cos . Then
(6.7.1) y
3
3y 1 = 0
which is clearly irreducible. Hence [Q(y): Q] = 3 so y is not constructible and hence cos is not
either. Hence cannot be trisected.
(Of course some angles can be trisected. For example a right angle can be.)
Now we come to the construction of the regular n-gon. Because it is possible to bisect angles, once
we have constructed an n-gon we can construct a 2n-gon (just bisect the angles at the centre).
6.7.14 Theorem If we can construct an m-gon and an n-gon with gcd(m, n) = 1 then we can construct
an mn-gon.
Proof Exercise.
119 Exercise Prove this. Hint: mx +ny = 1 for some integers x, y. Now divide by 2.
Finally, if we can construct a p
m
-gon then by joining every p
m1
th vertex we can construct a p-gon.
So we need to determine which regular p-gons are constructible, for p an odd prime. The Greeks knew
how to construct p-gons with p = 3, p = 5, but not p = 7. The following theorem explains why not.
(Later we shall prove the converse of this theorem.)
120 Exercise Give a construction of the equilateral triangle and the regular pentagon. Hint for the
pentagon: show that cos
2
5
=

51
4
.
6.7.15 Theorem Let p be an odd prime. If the regular p-gon can be constructed with compass and
straightedge, then p = 2
2
n
+ 1 for some n = 0, 1, 2, . . .. In particular the 7, 11, 13, 19-gons etc are
not constructible.
Proof Suppose the p-gon is constructible. Let = cos(2/p), so that is constructible, and hence
[Q(): Q] is a power of 2.
Let = e
2i/p
. Then = 1 so =
1
. Hence +
1
= + = 2 and so Q() and multiplying
by :

2
+ 1 = 2.
Thus [Q(): Q()] = 1 or 2, so [Q(): Q] is a power of 2, say 2
m
. But the minimum polynomial of
over Q is the cyclotomic polynomial
p
(x) = x
p1
+ x
p2
+ + 1 = (x
p
1)/(x 1), which is
irreducible of degree p 1 so
p = 2
m
+ 1.
96
CHAPTER 6. FIELD EXTENSIONS 4301 Notes
The rest is elementary number theory.
Claim: Let a 2 be an integer. If a
m
+ 1 is prime, then m is a power of 2.
Proof If k is odd the polynomial x
k
+ 1 has a factor of x + 1 (evaluate at x = 1). Explicitly:
x
k
+ 1 = (x + 1)(x
k1
x
k2
+ + 1)
If m has an odd factor k > 1, say m = kr with k odd, r 1 then putting x = a
r
,
a
m
+ 1 = (a
r
)
k
+ 1 = (a
r
+ 1)(a
r(k1)
a
r(k2)
+ + 1)
which is clearly not prime. So m cannot have any odd factor, so must be a power of 2.
Putting a = 2 nishes the proof.
121 Exercise Write down the rows of Pascals Triangle (binomial coecients). Reduce each coecient
modulo 2. Interpret each row as a binary number, reading left to right. For example, the 1, 3, 3, 1
row becomes 1111 = 15. Show that the rst few numbers you get are exactly the small odd n such
that the regular n-gon is constructible. Explain why this is so. Does this continue forever? If not,
why not, and when does it stop?
6.7.16 Denition The number F
n
= 2
2
n
+ 1 is called the nth Fermat number.
n 0 1 2 3 4 5
F
n
3 5 17 257 65537 4294967297
The number F
n
is known
5
to be prime for 0 n 4, so (by the converse of the theorem above,
which we have not yet proved) the regular 3, 5, 17, 257 and 65537-gons are all constructible. The last
3 were unknown to the Greeks. Gauss proved in 1796 (when he was 19) that the regular 17-gon is
constructible. Richelot and Schwendenwein found constructions for the 257-gon in 1832. De Temple
(1991) gave a construction of the 257-gon using 150 circles and a construction of the 65537-gon using
at most 1332 circles. See [6].
The number F
n
is composite for 5 n 32. It is unknown
6
if F
n
is prime for any n 33.
From a modern viewpoint, the idea of working only with constructible numbers ie with elds Q(

a
1
, . . . ,

a
m
)
where a
i
Q(

a
1
, . . . ,

a
i1
) seems unduly restrictive. In fact this is a extremely similar restriction
to requiring a polynomial to be solvable exactly by radicals as we shall see.
6.8. Splitting Fields
If we iterate Kroneckers construction we can get a eld containing all the roots of f.
6.8.1 Denition Let K be a eld and f K[x] 0. Let L/K be a eld extension. We say that f splits
in L if there exist
i
L and a K 0 with
f(x) = a(x
1
) (x
n
)
in L[x]. We say that L is a splitting eld for f if f splits in L with roots
1
, . . .
n
, and L = K(
1
,. . . ,

n
).
5
Note that F
5
1 bytes is exactly 4 Gb.
6
Note that F
33
9.63 10
2585827972
has more than 2.5 billion decimal digits, which would ll about 100 Brisbane
White Page telephone directories. Since there are only about 10
80
atoms in the universe, an F
33
-gon could never
physically be constructed.
97
6.8. SPLITTING FIELDS 4301 Notes
Note that a splitting eld is a nite algebraic extension by Theorem 6.6.3.
6.8.2 Example
Let f = x
2
2 Q[x]. Then f does not split in Q. It splits in R and in C. A splitting eld for
f over Q is Q(

2).
Let f = x
3
2 Q[x]. The three complex roots of f are
3

2 (the real cube root of 2) and

2,
2
3

2 where = e
2i/3
= 1/2 + i

3/2 is a complex cube root of 1. Thus f splits in C

as f(x) = (x
3

2)(x
3

2)(x
2
3

2). Over R, f factors into a linear and quadratic factor,

so does not split. A splitting eld of f over Q is L = Q(
3

2, ). This is a degree 6 extension of

Q (Example 6.6.7).
Let f = x
2
+ 1 F
p
[x]. If p = 2 then f(x) = (x + 1)
2
splits in F
2
. A theorem due to Fermat is
that if p 1 (mod 4) then x
2
1 (mod p) is solvable, so a splitting eld is F
p
. For example
if p = 5, x
2
+ 1 = (x + 2)(x + 3). But if p 3 (mod 4) then x
2
1 (mod p) is not solvable.
Let i be the roots of f in a splitting eld. Then a splitting eld for f over F
p
is F
p
(i). For
example if p = 3, F
p
(i) = 0, 1, 2, i, 1 + i, 2 + i, 2i, 1 + 2i, 2 + 2i. This is a nite eld with 9
elements.
6.8.3 Theorem Let K be a eld, f K[x] a polynomial. Then f has a splitting eld L over K and
[L: K] (deg f)! (Note the factorial.)
Proof Induction on n = deg f. If n = 1 there is nothing to prove, so assume the result holds for
all elds and all f of degree < n. By Kroneckers Theorem there is a eld K
1
= K[x]/f) with
[K
1
: K] n containing a root of f. So we can let f(x) = (x )g(x) for some g K
1
[x], deg g < n.
By the inductive hypothesis (applied to K
1
) there is a eld L K
1
in which g splits completely, and
[L: K
1
] (n 1)! Then f splits in L and [L: K] = [L: K
1
] [K
1
: K] n (n 1)!
With more work, one can show that if f is irreducible then [L: K] actually divides n!
6.8.4 Example
C is a splitting eld for x
2
+ 1 over R.
The Fundamental Theorem of Algebra says that every polynomial with coecients in C has all
its roots in C ie splits in C, so any splitting eld is of degree 1. The splitting eld of f R[x]
is either R or C, of degree at most 2 over R, but over Q it can be as large as n!
Let = e
2i/p
where p is prime. Then the minimum polynomial of over Q is
p
= x
p1
+
+ x + 1 (known to be irreducible using Eisensteins criterion and the change of variables
y = x + 1). Since the other roots of
p
are
2
,
3
etc, Q() is a splitting eld for
p
over Q, of
degree p 1.
Let K = F
2
. Let be a root of the irreducible polynomial f(x) = x
2
+ x + 1. Let L = K().
Then L is a splitting eld of f over K.
Proof (x +)(x ++1) = x
2
+x +x +x +
2
+ = x
2
+x +(
2
+) and
2
+ = 1 so
the other root of f is + 1 which is in L.
6.8.5 Example Let f K[x] be an irreducible cubic with splitting eld L and let n = [L: K]. Then
n 3! = 6. If is a root of f then [K(): K] = 3 [ n so n = 3 or 6. Both possibilities occur:
(a) Q(
3

2, ) is a splitting eld for x

3
2 over Q, where is a complex cube root of 1. This shows
that a degree 3 polynomial can have splitting eld of degree 3! = 6.
(b) Let f = x
3
3x 1 Q[x] and let be any root of f. Then Q() is a splitting eld of f
(HW3), so a splitting eld of this cubic has degree 3.
98
CHAPTER 6. FIELD EXTENSIONS 4301 Notes
Later (Theorem 7.10.4) we shall develop a test for cubics to distinguish between these two cases.
Any two
7
splitting elds for f over K are isomorphic. To demonstrate this we need the following
stronger version of Theorem 6.5.3.
6.8.6 Theorem [Isomorphism Extension (Splitting Fields)] Let : K
1
K
2
be an isomorphism, let
f K
1
[x] and let (f) K
2
[x] be the corresponding polynomial. Let L
1
be a splitting eld of f
over K
1
and L
2
a splitting eld of (f) over K
2
. Then there exists an isomorphism : L
1
L
2
with
[
K
1
= .
L
1

//
L
2
K
1

//
OO
K
2
OO
Furthermore, if f is monic and irreducible and
1
L
1
is any root of f and
2
L
2
is any root of
(f), then can be chosen with (
1
) =
2
.
Proof Induction on n = [L
1
: K
1
]. If n = 1 then f splits in K
1
so (f) splits in K
2
and so we take
= . In this case if f is irreducible then it must be linear, so f = x
1
, and (f) = x (
1
), so

2
= (
1
) = (
1
).
Thus suppose the result holds for splitting elds of degree less than n, and assume [L
1
: K
1
] = n > 1.
Since f does not split in K
1
, let g be an irreducible non-linear factor of f with root
1
L
1
K
1
, let

2
be a root of (g), let M
1
= K
1
(
1
) and M
2
= K
2
(
2
). By the simple version of the Isomorphism
Extension Theorem 6.5.3 there exists isomorphism : M
1
M
2
extending and sending
1

2
.
But [M
1
: K
1
] > 1 so [L
1
: M
1
] < n and since L
1
is also the splitting eld of f over M
1
, we may apply
the inductive hypothesis to . Thus there exists isomorphism : L
1
L
2
extending and hence
extending . This proves exists.
For the furthermore part: if f is irreducible then
1
, K
1
(else f has factor (x
1
)) so by taking
f = g and
i
=
i
we are done.
6.8.7 Corollary Any two splitting elds for f K[x] are isomorphic.
Proof Take K
1
= K
2
and = 1.
Indeed in this case the theorem gives:
6.8.8 Corollary Let f K[x] be monic and irreducible, let L be a splitting eld for f and let , be any
two roots of f. Then there exists an isomorphism : L L that xes each element of K and sends
.
6.8.9 Example Consider f = x
2
+1 over R with splitting eld C. The two roots of f in C are i so there
exist isomorphisms C C xing all of R and sending i to i. These are the identity map, and the
complex conjugation map. This is not surprising. The important point is that we can specify a eld
isomorphism C C xing each element of R just by describing where i goes.
7
However there is no preferred isomorphism between them. This is similar to the situation with vector spaces: any
two n-dimensional K-vector spaces are isomorphic, with an isomorphism given by making choices of where to send each
basis vector. Isomorphisms that are only dened by making choices in this way are said to be non-canonical . For
example, for each nite dimensional R-vector space V we may choose an isomorphism to the dual space
V
: V V

.
However if : V V is an isomorphism then the induced isomorphism

: V

may not commute with the

V
:
we may not have
V
=
V

. Compare: V is canonically isomorphic to V

, and the corresponding diagram does

commute. Summary: we should be careful when identifying non-canonically isomorphic objects, because commutative
diagrams will not be preserved.
99
6.9. ALGEBRAIC CLOSURES 4301 Notes
6.9. Algebraic Closures
The complex numbers have the property that every polynomial in C[x] factors completely into linear
polynomials. We generalize to other elds:
6.9.1 Theorem If K is a eld the following are equivalent:
(a) The only algebraic extension of K is K itself.
(b) The only nite extension of K is K itself.
(c) Every f K[x] splits in K.
(d) Every f K[x] has a root in K.
(e) The irreducible polynomials in K[x] are exactly the linear polynomials.
Proof (a) = (b) Any nite extension is algebraic (Theorem 6.6.1).
(b) = (c) Let L be a splitting eld of f. Then L/K is nite (Theorem 6.6.3) so L = K and f splits
in K.
(c) = (d) Clear.
(d) = (e) Let f be irreducible. Then it has a root in K by (d) hence a linear factor, so f must
actually be linear. Conversely any linear polynomial is irreducible (consider the degree of any factors).
(e) = (a) Let L be an algebraic extension, L. Let f K[x] be the minimum polynomial of .
Since f is irreducible (e) implies it is linear, hence must be (x ) so K.
6.9.2 Denition A eld satisfying any of the properties above is said to be algebraically closed. If K is
a eld, L/K is an algebraic extension and L is algebraically closed, then L is said to be an algebraic
closure of K, denoted K
al
.
Many authors write K for K
al
.
The best known example is:
6.9.3 Theorem [Fundamental Theorem of Algebra] The eld C is algebraically closed.
Proof We shall prove this later. See Theorem 7.5.7.
In fact, every eld is contained inside an algebraically closed eld:
6.9.4 Theorem Every eld K has an algebraic closure. Any two algebraic closures of K are isomorphic.
Proof Omitted. The basic idea is to consider the collection of all algebraic extensions of the given
eld. This is naturally ordered by . A (slightly tricky) Zorns Lemma argument (The Axiom
of Choice) shows that this collection has a maximal element, and one checks that this maximal
element is algebraically closed. The uniqueness is an innite version of the Isomorphism Extension
Theorem 6.8.6.
6.9.5 Example Q
al
,= C since C is not algebraic over Q.
6.9.6 Example z C [ z is algebraic over Q is an algebraic closure of Q.
Proof Let L be this set. Then L is a eld by Corollary 6.6.9, and L is algebraic over Q by denition.
Let f L[x]. Let C be any root of f and let M = L(). Then M/L is algebraic so M/Q is
100
CHAPTER 6. FIELD EXTENSIONS 4301 Notes
algebraic, so is algebraic over Q. But then L so f splits in L, which proves that L is algebraically
closed by Theorem 6.9.1.
Note that Q
al
is an innite extension of Q. Indeed, for any natural number n, f = x
n
2 is irreducible
over Q by Eisensteins Criterion, and Q
al
contains a root of f, so [Q
al
: Q] [Q(): Q] = n. This
shows algebraic does not imply nite.
Since Q is countable so is Q[x] and since each f Q[x] has only nitely many roots, Q
al
is also
countable. Thus Q
al
is much smaller than the uncountable eld C. This is Cantors proof (1874) that
there exist innitely many (uncountably many) transcendental numbers. Thus C/Q is not algebraic:
indeed almost every complex (or real) number is transcendental over Q.
122 Exercise Let F be a nite eld. Show that F
al
is innite. Hint: Modify Euclids proof that there are
innitely many primes. Thus an algebraically closed eld is never nite.
123 Exercise (a) Let C[[X]] denote the set of formal power series with complex coecients: C[[X]] =

n=0
a
n
X
n
[ a
n
C. Dene addition and multiplication in the obvious way. Show that
C[[X]] forms an integral domain. Note: there is no notion of convergence here. All series are
only considered formally.
(b) Let C((X)) denote the set of formal Laurent series with complex coecients C((X)) =

n=N
a
n
X
n
[
N Z, a
n
C. Thus an element of C((X)) may contain negative powers of X, but each ele-
ment has only nitely many negative powers. Prove that C((X)) is the quotient eld of C[[X]].
(c) Prove that the algebraic closure of C((X)) consists of the union over all positive integers N of
the Laurent series in X
1
N
, ie all expressions

n=k
a
n
X
n/N
for some k Z and N N.
(d) Let C[[X
Q
]] = f(X) =

Q
a

, a

C, suchthat [a

,= 0 is well ordered. (Recall

that a set is well ordered if every non-empty subset has a least element.) Prove that C[[X
Q
]] is
also algebraically closed.
(e) Is C[[X
Q
]] strictly larger than C((X))
al
? Explain.
This exercise is probably very dicult. See the entry for Puiseux series in Wikipedia.
6.10. Separable Extensions
In this section we discuss another important property of eld extensions called separability. All
characteristic 0 elds turn out to be separable, so we rst consider elds of characteristic p.
6.10.1 Denition Let F is a eld of characteristic p > 0. Then the map : F F given by x x
p
is a
called the Frobenius map.
6.10.2 Example Consider the eld F with 9 elements. We can write F = F
3
[i] where i
2
= 1, so
F = a +bi [ a, b F
3
. The Frobenius map is (a +bi) = (a +bi)
3
= a
3
b
3
i = a bi, using the fact
(Fermat) that x
3
x (mod 3). So is complex conjugation in this case.
6.10.3 Theorem Let F is a eld of characteristic p > 0. The Frobenius map : F F is a homomorphism
xing every element of F
p
F. In particular
(6.10.1)

a
p
i
=
_

a
i
_
p
in characteristic p. If F is nite then is an isomorphism.
Proof We know that F is a eld extension of F
p
, and that x
p
x (mod p) for all x, by Fermat, so
(x) = x for all x F
p
. Clearly (xy) = (x)(y). The interesting part is that (x+y) = (x)+(y).
101
6.10. SEPARABLE EXTENSIONS 4301 Notes
The Binomial Theorem gives
(x +y) = (x +y)
p
=
p

i=0
_
p
i
_
x
i
y
pi
.
Now use the fact that p [
_
p
i
_
for 1 i p 1. So all the terms in the sum except x
p
and y
p
are all
0 in characteristic p.
Finally, since is a homomorphism of elds it is injective. An injective map from a nite set to itself
is also surjective.
We now illustrate a peculiar behaviour that can occur in characteristic p.
6.10.4 Example Let K = F
2
(t), the function eld in one variable with coecients in F
2
. It contains all
rational functions with coecients in F
2
. Note that K is an innite eld of characteristic 2.
Consider the polynomial F K[x] given by F(x) = x
2
t. Here x is the variable (which will take on
values in K ie rational functions), and t K is the constant coecient.
Claim: The polynomial F does not have any roots in K, and hence is irreducible.
Proof Suppose g/h is a root of F where g and h are polynomials in t. Then g
2
/h
2
= t so g
2
= th
2
.
But g
2
has even degree (in t) while th
2
has odd degree, contradiction.
A root of F would be a square root of t,

t. A splitting eld of F over K is K(

t). Elements of
this eld look like rational functions with coecients in F
2
in the variable

t. For example
(1+

t)
(t
2

t+1

K(

t).
In its splitting eld F factors as (x

t)
2
= x
2
2x

t +t = x
2
t.
We have found an irreducible polynomial with repeated roots in its splitting eld.
Similarly if we take K = F
p
(t) and F(x) = x
p
t, a splitting eld is K(t
1/p
), and x
p
t factors as
(x t
1/p
)
p
in its splitting eld by equation 6.10.1.
6.10.5 Theorem Let f K[x] be a monic irreducible polynomial. The following are equivalent:
(a) f has a multiple root (in a splitting eld).
(b) gcd(f, f

) ,= 1.
(c) K has characteristic p > 0, and f = g(x
p
) for some g K[x].
(d) All the roots of f are repeated.
Proof
(a) i (b) is Lemma 1.4.5. (This does not use the fact that f is irreducible.)
(b) = (c) Since f

has lower degree than f but f is irreducible gcd(f, f

) ,= 1 is impossible,
unless f

= 0 (the zero polynomial). Let f =

a
n
x
n
, so f

na
n
x
n1
= 0 so na
n
= 0 for each
n. In characteristic 0 this says all the a
n
= 0 (n 1) so f is constant and gcd(f, f

) = 1, but in
characteristic p it only says a
n
= 0 or p [ n, so f = a
0
+a
p
x
p
+a
2p
x
2p
+ = g(x
p
).
(c) = (d) Let g =

(x
i
) in a splitting eld. Form a still larger eld by adjoining
i
=
p

i
for
each i. Over this eld f =

(x
p

p
i
) =

(x
i
)
p
and all the roots of f are repeated.
(d) = (a) is trivial.
102
CHAPTER 6. FIELD EXTENSIONS 4301 Notes
6.10.6 Example We quite often need to adjoin root(s) of x
n
a to a eld (a ,= 0). Let K be a eld of
characteristic 0, or p not dividing n. Then n is invertible in K.
8
Let f = x
n
a. Then f

= nx
n1
so
f = (n
1
x)f

a so by Euclids gcd algorithm gcd(f, f

) = gcd(f

, a) = 1. Thus the derivative test

shows that x
n
a has distinct roots as long as the characteristic does not divide n.
6.10.7 Denition Let K be a eld. An irreducible polynomial f K[x] is separable if it has no repeated
roots in any splitting eld. An arbitrary polynomial is said to be separable if all its irreducible factors
are. If L/K is a eld extension and L is algebraic, then is said to be separable over K if
its minimum polynomial over K is separable. A eld extension L/K is separable if every L is
separable over K.
Note that if L/K is separable then it is algebraic by denition. Example 6.10.4 is a (typical) example
of a non-separable extension. The element

t F
2
(t,

t) is algebraic but not separable, and x

2
t
F
2
(t)[x] is a non-separable polynomial.
Notice that if L/K is not separable then extending L to a larger eld will not remove the repeated
roots. Non-separable extensions are rather unpleasant, so we make the following denition.
6.10.8 Denition A eld K is perfect if every polynomial in K[x] is separable.
6.10.9 Theorem A eld K is perfect i
(a) K has characteristic 0, or
(b) K has characteristic p > 0 and K = K
p
(ie, every element of K is a pth power).
Proof = Suppose K is perfect and char K = p > 0. We must show K = K
p
. If not, K contains
an element a that is not a pth power. Let f(x) = x
p
a. If = (
p

a) in some larger eld then f

factors in K() as (x )
p
, so it has repeated roots in a splitting eld. Moreover f is irreducible: if
f factors in K[x] we must have (x )
m
K[x] for some 0 < m < p. The coecient of the x
m1
term is m so m K and m is invertible (recall m means 1 +1 + +1 ,= 0 since 0 < m < p) so
K contradiction. Thus f is not separable.
= If char K = 0 the result follows from Theorem 6.10.5, so suppose char K = p > 0 and K = K
p
.
It is enough to prove that every irreducible polynomial is separable, so let f K[x] be irreducible.
If f is non-separable then by Theorem 6.10.5 f =

a
i
x
ip
. But if we let a
i
= b
p
i
with b
i
K then
f = (

b
i
x
i
)
p
so is not irreducible, contradiction.
The condition K = K
p
is exactly the condition that the Frobenius map is an isomorphism (surjective).
6.10.10 Corollary All nite elds are perfect.
Proof The Frobenius map is surjective (Theorem 6.10.3).
6.10.11 Example If F is any nite eld then K = F(t) is not perfect.
Proof In this eld t is not a pth power, so K ,= K
p
.
In summary: all characteristic 0 elds and nite elds are perfect, but transcendental extensions of
nite elds may not be.
If is algebraic over K then K()/K is an algebraic extension: every rational expression in is
actually algebraic itself (Example 6.6.2). The same is true for separability. To prove this, we need a
way of counting the number of distinct roots of a polynomial.
8
Recall that n means the image of n under the map Z K, ie 1 + 1 + + 1.
103
6.10. SEPARABLE EXTENSIONS 4301 Notes
6.10.12 Denition Let K()/K be an algebraic extension. Let f K[x] be the minimum polynomial
of . The separable degree of K() over K, denoted [K(): K]
sep
is the number of homomorphisms
: K K
al
satisfying (x) = x for all x K.
6.10.13 Example Consider C = R(i)/R. A homomorphism C C = R
al
xing R is injective and is also a
linear map of real vector spaces C C. But if V is a nite dimensional K-vector space and T : V V
is an injective linear map then T is also surjective (Fundamental Theorem of Linear Algebra). Thus
such a homomorphism C C is actually an isomorphism of elds. The Isomorphism Extension
Theorem shows that the number of isomorphisms C C = R
al
xing each element of R is 2: the
identity and complex conjugation. See Example 6.5.4. So [C: R]
sep
= 2.
In general let K()/K be an algebraic extension. Let f K[x] be the minimum polynomial of and
let

be any other root of f (in K

al
). The Isomorphism Extension Theorem applied to the diagram
K()

//
K(

)
K
OO
K
OO
shows that for each distinct root

of f there is a homomorphism K() K()

K
al
. Conversely,
if : K() K
al
is any homomorphism and () =

K
al
then

is a root of f:
Proof Let f =

a
i
x
i
with a
i
K. Then 0 = f() =

a
n

n
. Applying , which xes each a
i
:
0 =

a
n
()
n
= f
_
()
_
, so

is a root of f.
Moreover, a homomorphism K() K
al
that xes each element of K is uniquely determined by
where it sends .
We have proved:
6.10.14 Theorem Let K()/K be an algebraic extension. Let f K[x] be the minimum polynomial of
. Then [K(): K]
sep
is the number of distinct roots of f in K
al
.
6.10.15 Corollary [K(): K]
sep
[K(): K], with equality i is separable over K.
More generally:
6.10.16 Denition Let L/K be a nite extension. The separable degree of L over K, denoted [L: K]
sep
is
dened to be the number of homomorphisms L K
al
xing each element of K.
6.10.17 Theorem Assume L = K(
1
, . . . ,
m
) is a nite extension of K. Then:
(a) [L: K]
sep
[L: K]
(b) Equality holds i all the
i
are separable over K.
Proof (a) We count the number of homomorphisms : L K
al
xing K. We can obtain every such
homomorphism in stages, by starting with the identity map K K K
al
, extending it to a map
K(
1
) K
al
, then extending it further to a map K(
2
,
2
) K
al
etc.
Let K
0
= K and K
i
= K(
1
, . . . ,
i
). Let f
1
be the minimum polynomial of
1
over K, and let
f
1
have n
1
distinct roots in K
al
. By Theorem 6.10.14 there are n
1
ways to extend the identity map
K K K
al
to a map K(
1
) K
al
.
Let f
2
be the minimum polynomial of
2
over K(
1
) = K
1
(not over K), and let n
2
be the number of
distinct roots of f
2
in K
al
= K(
1
)
al
. By the above argument, there are n
2
ways to extend further to
104
CHAPTER 6. FIELD EXTENSIONS 4301 Notes
a map K(
1
,
2
) K
al
. Altogether, there are n
1
n
2
homomorphisms K(
1
,
2
) K
al
xing each
element of K.
Repeating this argument shows [L: K]
sep
= n
1
n
m
deg(f
1
) deg(f
2
) deg(f
m
) = [K
1
: K]
[K
2
: K
1
] [K
n
: K
n1
] = [K
n
: K] = [L: K].
(b) = [Contrapositive] If
1
is not separable over K then n
1
< deg f
1
so [L: K]
sep
< [L: K]. Since
the eld K(
1
, . . . ,
n
) is unchanged under reordering the
i
we see that if any
i
is not separable
over K then [L: K]
sep
< [L: K].
= We have equality i each f
i
has distinct roots in K
al
, i each
i
is separable over K
i1
. Let F
i
be the minimum polynomial of
i
over K. Then F
i
K[x] K
i1
[x] and F
i
(
i
) = 0, so f
i
[ F
i
. If
each
i
is separable over K then each F
i
has distinct roots, so each f
i
has distinct roots, so we have
[L: K]
sep
= [L: K].
6.10.18 Corollary A nite eld extension L = K(
1
, . . . ,
m
) is separable over K i every generator
i
is
separable over K.
Proof = This is trivial.
= Suppose some element L is not separable over K. Since L we can write L =
K(,
1
. . . ,
m
). The previous theorem now shows that [L: K]
sep
< [L: K].
For example, if is separable over K, then every element of K() is separable over K.
With a little more work, it follows that if F/L/K is a tower of nite eld extensions then F/K is
separable i F/L and L/K are both separable.
6.11. Normal Extensions
If f K[x] is irreducible and separable of degree n it has n distinct roots in a splitting eld. This
does not mean that it has n roots in any eld extension of K.
6.11.1 Denition An extension L/K is normal if every irreducible polynomial f over K with at least one
root in L actually splits in L.
Note that f must be irreducible in the denition.
6.11.2 Example C/R is normal since every polynomial over R splits in C.
6.11.3 Example Q(
3

2)/Q is not normal. The polynomial x

3
2 has a root in Q(
3

2) but its other two

roots are not real so are not in Q(
3

2). Note that Q(

3

2) is not a splitting eld of x

3
2.
6.11.4 Example Q(i)/Q is normal. Let f Q[x] be irreducible. Because complex conjugation is a eld
homomorphism, f(a +bi) = f(a +bi). So if f(a +bi) = 0 then 0 = f(a +bi) = f(a +bi), so if f has
a root a + bi Q(i) it also has a root a bi Q(i). This means g = (x (a + bi))(x (a bi)) =
x
2
2ax (a
2
+ b
2
) is a factor of f. But f was irreducible, so f = cg for some constant c and all of
the roots of f are in Q(i). Note that Q(i) is a splitting eld.
124 Exercise Give an example of a tower of elds K L M such that M/L and L/F are normal, but
M/K is not normal.
6.11.5 Example Here is a subtle example. Let be the real cube root of 2 and let be a primitive cube
root of unity. Let K = Q(). The polynomial x
3
2 has roots , ,
2
. The last two are not real
hence not in K. Does this mean that K is not a normal extension of itself? No: f is reducible in
105
6.11. NORMAL EXTENSIONS 4301 Notes
K[x]. Indeed f = (x )(x
2
+ x +
2
) = gh say (dierence of cubes). We have g, h K[x]. Each
is irreducible (h is irreducible because its roots are and
2
not in K). So f = gh where g has a
root in K and splits in K and h has no roots in K. There is no violation of the normality condition.
Indeed a eld K is always a normal extension of itself: If f K[x] is irreducible and has a root in K
it must be linear, hence trivially splits in K.
The nicest of all eld extensions L/K are the separable and normal ones. In such extensions any
irreducible f of degree n with a least one root in L has exactly n distinct roots in L. We shall call
such extensions Galois (formal denition later).
125 Exercise Give an example of a nite extension of elds that is neither separable nor normal.
The precise relationship between normality and splitting elds is as follows.
6.11.6 Theorem An extension L/K is normal and nite i L is a splitting eld of a (not necessarily
irreducible) polynomial over K.
It can be shown that an innite extension L/K is normal i L is a splitting eld of a set of polynomials
over K.
Proof = If L/K is nite then L = K(
1
, . . . ,
n
) for some algebraic
i
. Let p
i
be the minimum
polynomial of
i
over K and let f = p
1
p
2
p
n
. Each p
i
is irreducible over K and has a root in L, so
must split in L, so f splits in L. But L is generated by roots of f so L is a splitting eld of f.
= Suppose L is a splitting eld of some g K[x]. Since L is generated by the roots of g it is a
nite extension (Theorem 6.6.3). We must show it is normal.
Let h be an irreducible polynomial with
a root in L. We must show h splits in
L. Let F L be a splitting eld of gh
over K.
F
[
L
g splits
_
[
K
_

_
gh splits
Suppose
1
and
2
are any two roots of h in F.
Claim: [L(
1
): L] = [L(
2
): L].
Given the claim, let
1
be the root of h known to be in L, and let
2
be any other root of h (necessarily
in F). By the claim [L(
2
): L] = 1 so
2
L also. Thus h splits in L which proves L/K is normal.
106
CHAPTER 6. FIELD EXTENSIONS 4301 Notes
Proof of Claim:
F
L(
1
)
<<
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
L(
2
)
bbF
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
L
OO
bbF
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
<<
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
K(
1
)
OO
K(
2
)
OO
K
OO
bbF
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
<<
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
For j = 1, 2 we have
(6.11.1) [L(
j
): L][L: K] = [L(
j
): K(
j
)][K(
j
): K].
By Theorem 6.5.3 (take K
1
= K
2
and the identity map) we have K(
1
) K(
2
), so [K(
1
): K] =
[K(
2
): K]. And L(
j
) is a splitting eld for g over K(
j
) so [L(
1
): K(
1
)] = [L(
2
): K(
2
)] by
Theorem 6.8.6. Hence the claim follows from equation 6.11.1.
Consider Q(
3

2). This is not a normal extension (equivalently, not a splitting eld) but it becomes
normal when we adjoin a further element (since then we have a splitting eld of x
3
2 over Q). A
minimal normal extension of K containing L is called a normal closure of L/K.
6.11.7 Denition Let L/K be an algebraic extension. An extension N of L is called a normal closure of
L/K if
N is a normal extension of K and
If F is any other normal extension of K with L F N then F = N.
6.11.8 Theorem Let L/K be a nite extension.
(a) L has a normal closure N, and N/K is nite.
(b) If L = K(
1
, . . . ,
n
) then we can take N to be a splitting eld of the product of the minimum
polynomials of all the
i
.
(c) N is unique up to isomorphism.
(d) If L/K is separable then N/K is also separable.
Proof Clearly (b) implies (a), so we prove (b). Fix
i
with L = K(
1
, . . . ,
n
), let
i
have minimum
polynomial f
i
over K, let f = f
1
f
n
and let N be a splitting eld of f over K. By Theorem 6.6.3
N/K is nite. Since N is a splitting eld over K it is normal over K (Theorem 6.11.6). Suppose
L F N with F normal over K. For each
i
L F we have by normality that f
i
splits in F.
This means all the generators
i
of F actually lie in F so N = F.
(c) Suppose N

is another normal closure of L/K. Since each

i
L N

, normality of N

/K implies
f must split in N

. Let N

be a splitting eld of f with L N

. Since N

is normal (it is a
splitting eld), the minimality of N

implies N

= N

. So N

and N are both splitting elds of f over

L, so are isomorphic by Corollary 6.8.7.
(d) If L/K is separable then each
i
and hence each f
i
is separable. Thus all the roots of f are
separable over K. Hence N/K is separable by Corollary 6.10.18.
107
6.12. TRANSCENDENTAL NUMBERS 4301 Notes
6.12. Transcendental Numbers
We take a break from algebraic arguments to consider transcendental extensions briey.
6.12.1 Denition Let L/K be a eld extension. If L is not algebraic over K then is said to be
transcendental over K, and L/K is a transcendental extension.
Recall that nite implies algebraic, so (by the contrapositive) every transcendental extension is innite.
6.12.2 Example K(t) is a transcendental extension of K.
6.12.3 Theorem R/Q is a transcendental extension. That is, there exist elements in R that do not satisfy
any non-zero polynomial with rational coecients.
This is not obvious. The rst example is due to Liouville in 1844, who showed that the number
=

n=1
10
n!
= 0.11000100 . . .
is transcendental. The idea behind the proof is to show that this number is too well approximated by
rational numbers with small denominators to be the root of any polynomial (see exercises).
126 Exercise
(a) Let f(x) = a
n
x
n
+ + a
0
= 0 where the a
i
Z. Let p, q Z with q ,= 0. (The numbers p
and q do not have to be prime.) Show that if f(p/q) ,= 0 then [f(p/q)[ 1/q
n
.
(b) Let x
0
be a root of f. Suppose p/q is closer to x
0
than to any other root of f, and assume
p/q (x
0
1, x
0
+1). Let M be chosen such that [f

(y)[ < M for all y (x

0
1, x
0
+1). Show
that
[
p
q
x
0
[ M
1
q
n
.
Hint: the Mean Value Theorem.
(c) Hence show that for any r > n and K > 0 there exist only nitely many p and q with
[
p
q
x
0
[ < K
1
q
r
.
(d) Prove that Liouvilles number is transcendental.
Indeed, let R be an algebraic number with minimum polynomial over Q of degree d > 1. Liouville
proved that for any C > 0 and > 0 there are only nitely many pairs of integers
9
(p, q) satisfying

p
q

<
C
q
(d)+
for (d) = d. This has been improved as follows:
Liouville 1851 (d) = d
Thue 1909 (d) =
1
2
d + 1 if d 3
Siegel 1921 (d) = 2

d
Gelfond & Dyson 1947 (d) =

2d
Roth 1955 (d) = 2
Roth received a Fields Medal for this theorem. A result of Dirichlet shows that Roths theorem is
best possible: for any there are innitely many (p, q) with

p
q

<
1
q
2
.
9
The integers p and q do not have to be primes.
108
CHAPTER 6. FIELD EXTENSIONS 4301 Notes
127 Exercise Using Thues result, prove that for any integers A, B, C with C ,= 0 the equation
Ax
3
+By
3
= Cz
3
has only nitely many solutions in integers x, y.
The rst naturally occurring number proved to be transcendental was e.
128 Exercise It is not too dicult to prove that e is irrational. (Lambert 1767.) Do so. Hint: e =

n=0
1
n!
.
This proof is due to Fourier.
6.12.4 Theorem [Hermite, 1873] The number e is transcendental.
Proof The proof is by contradiction. Suppose e is algebraic, so that
(6.12.1) a
m
e
m
+ +a
1
e +a
0
= 0
where m 1, a
i
Z, a
m
,= 0 and a
0
,= 0 (otherwise we could divide through by e).Now let p be a
suciently large prime number (size to be determined later), and dene
f(x) =
x
p1
(x 1)
p
(x 2)
p
(x m)
p
(p 1)!
.
Thus f is a polynomial of degree mp +p 1. Now let
F(x) = f(x) +f

(x) +f

(x) + +f
(mp+p1)
(x).
Note that f
(mp+p)
(x) is the zero polynomial so that F(x) F

(x) = f(x). Now calculate

d
dx
_
e
x
F(x)
_
= e
x
(F

(x) F(x)) = e
x
f(x).
So for any j = 0, 1, . . . , m
a
j
_
j
0
e
x
f(x) dx = a
j
_
e
x
F(x)
_
j
0
= a
j
F(0) a
j
e
j
F(j).
Multiply by e
j
and sum over all j:
()
m

j=0
a
j
e
j
_
j
0
e
x
f(x) dx = F(0)
m

j=0
a
j
e
j

j=0
a
j
F(j) =
m

j=0
a
j
F(j).
using assumption 6.12.1. We now estimate both sides of this equation to obtain the contradiction.
m

j=0
a
j
F(j) =
m

j=0
mp+p1

k=0
a
j
f
(k)
(j).
Now recall Leibnizs rule for higher derivatives of products (cf the Binomial Theorem):
(uv)

= u

v +uv

(uv)

= u

v + 2u

+uv

(uv)

= u

v + 3u

+ 3u

+uv

.
.
.
.
.
.
(uv)
(m)
=

_
m
r
_
u
(r)
v
(mr)
Consider f
(k)
(j) with j ,= 0. Take u to be (x j)
p
and v to be the product of the remaining terms in
f. All the terms in f
(k)
(j) will be zero, unless u = (xj)
p
is dierentiated exactly p times (fewer and
j is still a root; more and we have dierentiated down to the 0 polynomial). The term u
(p)
(j) = p!
which cancels with the (p 1)! in v. So f
(k)
(j) consists of a sum of integers, each divisible by p, for
j ,= 0.
109
6.12. TRANSCENDENTAL NUMBERS 4301 Notes
If j = 0, f
(k)
(j) is 0 unless u = x
p1
is dierentiated exactly p 1 times, producing (p 1)! and
cancelling the denominator in v. If k = p 1 then f
(k)
(0) = (1)
p
(m)
p
= (m!)
p
. For k p the
v term is also dierentiated at least once, producing an integer divisible by p.
Altogether
m

j=0
a
j
F(j) = a
0
(m!)
p
+pS
for some integer S. If p > [a
0
[ and p > m then p does not divide the right hand side, so that the sum
is an integer not divisible by p. In particular the sum is a non-zero integer, for all suciently large
primes p. So the absolute value of the RHS in equation () is at least 1.
Now we estimate the integral in equation (). For 0 x m we have
[f(x)[
m
mp+p1
(p 1)!
= K say.
So

j=0
a
j
e
j
_
j
0
e
x
f(x) dx

j=0
[a
j
[ e
j
_
j
0
[e
x
f(x)[ dx

j=0
[a
j
[ e
j
K
_
j
0
e
x
dx
= K
m

j=0
[a
j
[ e
j
(1 e
j
)
K
m

j=0
[a
j
[ e
j
.
Claim: As p we have K 0.
Given the claim, the expression above is less than 1/2 (say) in absolute value for all suciently large
p. This is a contradiction.
Proof (Of Claim) If m = 1 it is obvious. Otherwise
K =
m
mp+p1
(p 1)!
=
1
m
(m
m+1
)
p
(p 1)!
=
c
m
_
c
p 1

c
p 2

c
c
_ _
c
c 1

c
c 2

c
1
_
where c = m
m+1
is constant. Every term in the rst [ ] is 1, the second [ ] is a constant not
involving p, and the term c/(p 1) 0 as p .
A similar (but more complicated) proof shows that is transcendental. It is not known whether +e
is transcendental.
A generalization of this argument yields:
6.12.5 Theorem [LindemannWeierstrass, 1895] Let
1
, . . . ,
n
be distinct algebraic numbers. Then
e

1
, . . . , e

m
is linearly independent over Q.
Proof Omitted. The proof is similar in spirit to the proof that e is irrational, but more involved.
The transcendence of some numbers follows easily.
6.12.6 Corollary The numbers and e are transcendental over Q.
110
CHAPTER 6. FIELD EXTENSIONS 4301 Notes
Proof Suppose e is algebraic. Then

n
i=1
a
i
e
i
= 0 for some a
i
Q not all 0. So e
0
, e
1
, . . . , e
n
are
linearly dependent over Q, contradicting the LindemannWeierstrass theorem.
For : if is algebraic so is i, so e
0
, e
i
is linearly independent over Q. But this is false since
e
0
+e
i
= 0.
Hilberts Seventh Problem is concerned with the following dicult result:
6.12.7 Theorem [GelfondSchneider 1934] If , ,= 0, 1 are algebraic over Q and is irrational then

is transcendental over Q.
129 Exercise Show that there exist irrational numbers a and b such that a
b
is rational. Hint: consider

2,

2
,
_

2
_

2
.
130 Exercise In this exercise we prove that is irrational.
(a) Let I
n
=
_
1
1
(1 x
2
)
n
cos(x) dx. By integrating by parts and induction show that

2n+1
I
n
= n!(P sin() +Qcos())
where P and Q are polynomials in of degree < 2n + 1 with integer coecients.
(b) Assume = a/b with a, b Z. Take = /2 and let J
n
= a
2n+1
I
n
/n!. Prove that J
n
is a
non-zero integer.
(c) Show that J
n
0 as n for a contradiction.
131 Exercise Let L/K be a eld extension, and suppose , L are transcendental over K. Let t be an
indeterminate (ie a variable). Prove that K() K() K(t) the eld of rational functions in t.
132 Exercise Show that if
1
, . . . ,
n
are Q-linearly independent algebraic numbers then there is no
non-zero polynomial f Q[x
1
, . . . , x
n
] with f(e

1
, . . . , e

n
) = 0.
133 Exercise If is a non-zero algebraic number show that sin, cos and tan are transcendental over
Q.
111