If $K(alpha)/K$ is Galois and $exists sigmain G$ such that $sigma alpha=alpha^-1$, show $[K(alpha+alpha^-1):K]=frac12[K(alpha):K]$.
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Let $L/K$ be a Galois extension with Galois group $G$. Suppose there exists $alphain L$ and $sigmain G$ such that $L=K(alpha)$ and $sigma alpha=alpha^-1$. Prove that $[L:K]$ is even and $[K(alpha+alpha^-1):K]=frac12[L:K]$.
I think that I've almost figured this one out, but I can't seem to get one last detail. Here are my thoughts. Let $n$ be the order of $G$ and note that since $sigma$ has order $2$ in $G$ we have $2mid n=[L:K]$. In fact the Galois correspondence shows that $[L:L^langle sigma rangle]=2$, so $[L^langle sigma rangle:K]=n/2.$ My claim is now that $L^langle sigma rangle=K(alpha+alpha^-1)$. Clearly $alpha+alpha^-1in L^langle sigma rangle$ so this establishes $K(alpha+alpha^-1) subseteq L^langle sigma rangle$. Let's now suppose that this inclusion is strict, i.e., $K(alpha+alpha^-1) subsetneq L^langle sigma rangle$. We know that $K(alpha+alpha^-1)=L^H$ for some $Hleq G$, and the strict inclusion says that there is some $tau in Hbackslash langle sigma rangle$ that fixes $alpha+alpha^-1$. I feel like I should be able to derive a contradiction from this (something along the lines of $taualpha=alpha$, which would imply $tau=sigma$), but I can't figure out where to go from here...
abstract-algebra field-theory galois-theory extension-field
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Let $L/K$ be a Galois extension with Galois group $G$. Suppose there exists $alphain L$ and $sigmain G$ such that $L=K(alpha)$ and $sigma alpha=alpha^-1$. Prove that $[L:K]$ is even and $[K(alpha+alpha^-1):K]=frac12[L:K]$.
I think that I've almost figured this one out, but I can't seem to get one last detail. Here are my thoughts. Let $n$ be the order of $G$ and note that since $sigma$ has order $2$ in $G$ we have $2mid n=[L:K]$. In fact the Galois correspondence shows that $[L:L^langle sigma rangle]=2$, so $[L^langle sigma rangle:K]=n/2.$ My claim is now that $L^langle sigma rangle=K(alpha+alpha^-1)$. Clearly $alpha+alpha^-1in L^langle sigma rangle$ so this establishes $K(alpha+alpha^-1) subseteq L^langle sigma rangle$. Let's now suppose that this inclusion is strict, i.e., $K(alpha+alpha^-1) subsetneq L^langle sigma rangle$. We know that $K(alpha+alpha^-1)=L^H$ for some $Hleq G$, and the strict inclusion says that there is some $tau in Hbackslash langle sigma rangle$ that fixes $alpha+alpha^-1$. I feel like I should be able to derive a contradiction from this (something along the lines of $taualpha=alpha$, which would imply $tau=sigma$), but I can't figure out where to go from here...
abstract-algebra field-theory galois-theory extension-field
1
It's not? If $beta=sum c_ialpha^iin L$ then don't we have $sigma^2beta=sigma(sum c_ialpha^-i)=sum c_ialpha^i=beta$?
â Arbutus
Aug 10 at 20:24
1
I'm sorry, I forgot that $L=K(alpha)$. If $L$ is not generated by just $alpha$ alone, then $sigma$ can have a higher even order. That's why I deleted the comment.
â Batominovski
Aug 10 at 20:30
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Let $L/K$ be a Galois extension with Galois group $G$. Suppose there exists $alphain L$ and $sigmain G$ such that $L=K(alpha)$ and $sigma alpha=alpha^-1$. Prove that $[L:K]$ is even and $[K(alpha+alpha^-1):K]=frac12[L:K]$.
I think that I've almost figured this one out, but I can't seem to get one last detail. Here are my thoughts. Let $n$ be the order of $G$ and note that since $sigma$ has order $2$ in $G$ we have $2mid n=[L:K]$. In fact the Galois correspondence shows that $[L:L^langle sigma rangle]=2$, so $[L^langle sigma rangle:K]=n/2.$ My claim is now that $L^langle sigma rangle=K(alpha+alpha^-1)$. Clearly $alpha+alpha^-1in L^langle sigma rangle$ so this establishes $K(alpha+alpha^-1) subseteq L^langle sigma rangle$. Let's now suppose that this inclusion is strict, i.e., $K(alpha+alpha^-1) subsetneq L^langle sigma rangle$. We know that $K(alpha+alpha^-1)=L^H$ for some $Hleq G$, and the strict inclusion says that there is some $tau in Hbackslash langle sigma rangle$ that fixes $alpha+alpha^-1$. I feel like I should be able to derive a contradiction from this (something along the lines of $taualpha=alpha$, which would imply $tau=sigma$), but I can't figure out where to go from here...
abstract-algebra field-theory galois-theory extension-field
Let $L/K$ be a Galois extension with Galois group $G$. Suppose there exists $alphain L$ and $sigmain G$ such that $L=K(alpha)$ and $sigma alpha=alpha^-1$. Prove that $[L:K]$ is even and $[K(alpha+alpha^-1):K]=frac12[L:K]$.
I think that I've almost figured this one out, but I can't seem to get one last detail. Here are my thoughts. Let $n$ be the order of $G$ and note that since $sigma$ has order $2$ in $G$ we have $2mid n=[L:K]$. In fact the Galois correspondence shows that $[L:L^langle sigma rangle]=2$, so $[L^langle sigma rangle:K]=n/2.$ My claim is now that $L^langle sigma rangle=K(alpha+alpha^-1)$. Clearly $alpha+alpha^-1in L^langle sigma rangle$ so this establishes $K(alpha+alpha^-1) subseteq L^langle sigma rangle$. Let's now suppose that this inclusion is strict, i.e., $K(alpha+alpha^-1) subsetneq L^langle sigma rangle$. We know that $K(alpha+alpha^-1)=L^H$ for some $Hleq G$, and the strict inclusion says that there is some $tau in Hbackslash langle sigma rangle$ that fixes $alpha+alpha^-1$. I feel like I should be able to derive a contradiction from this (something along the lines of $taualpha=alpha$, which would imply $tau=sigma$), but I can't figure out where to go from here...
abstract-algebra field-theory galois-theory extension-field
asked Aug 10 at 20:06
Arbutus
538515
538515
1
It's not? If $beta=sum c_ialpha^iin L$ then don't we have $sigma^2beta=sigma(sum c_ialpha^-i)=sum c_ialpha^i=beta$?
â Arbutus
Aug 10 at 20:24
1
I'm sorry, I forgot that $L=K(alpha)$. If $L$ is not generated by just $alpha$ alone, then $sigma$ can have a higher even order. That's why I deleted the comment.
â Batominovski
Aug 10 at 20:30
add a comment |Â
1
It's not? If $beta=sum c_ialpha^iin L$ then don't we have $sigma^2beta=sigma(sum c_ialpha^-i)=sum c_ialpha^i=beta$?
â Arbutus
Aug 10 at 20:24
1
I'm sorry, I forgot that $L=K(alpha)$. If $L$ is not generated by just $alpha$ alone, then $sigma$ can have a higher even order. That's why I deleted the comment.
â Batominovski
Aug 10 at 20:30
1
1
It's not? If $beta=sum c_ialpha^iin L$ then don't we have $sigma^2beta=sigma(sum c_ialpha^-i)=sum c_ialpha^i=beta$?
â Arbutus
Aug 10 at 20:24
It's not? If $beta=sum c_ialpha^iin L$ then don't we have $sigma^2beta=sigma(sum c_ialpha^-i)=sum c_ialpha^i=beta$?
â Arbutus
Aug 10 at 20:24
1
1
I'm sorry, I forgot that $L=K(alpha)$. If $L$ is not generated by just $alpha$ alone, then $sigma$ can have a higher even order. That's why I deleted the comment.
â Batominovski
Aug 10 at 20:30
I'm sorry, I forgot that $L=K(alpha)$. If $L$ is not generated by just $alpha$ alone, then $sigma$ can have a higher even order. That's why I deleted the comment.
â Batominovski
Aug 10 at 20:30
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
Since $alpha$ satisfies the quadratic $T^2-T(alpha + alpha^-1) + 1$, we have that $[K(alpha) : K(alpha + alpha^-1)] le 2$. Thus, $[K(alpha + alpha^-1) : K] ge n/2$.
The tower $L^sigma/K(alpha + alpha^-1) /K$ with $[L^sigma:K] = n/2$ now implies $L^sigma = K(alpha + alpha^-1)$.
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
Since $alpha$ satisfies the quadratic $T^2-T(alpha + alpha^-1) + 1$, we have that $[K(alpha) : K(alpha + alpha^-1)] le 2$. Thus, $[K(alpha + alpha^-1) : K] ge n/2$.
The tower $L^sigma/K(alpha + alpha^-1) /K$ with $[L^sigma:K] = n/2$ now implies $L^sigma = K(alpha + alpha^-1)$.
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
Since $alpha$ satisfies the quadratic $T^2-T(alpha + alpha^-1) + 1$, we have that $[K(alpha) : K(alpha + alpha^-1)] le 2$. Thus, $[K(alpha + alpha^-1) : K] ge n/2$.
The tower $L^sigma/K(alpha + alpha^-1) /K$ with $[L^sigma:K] = n/2$ now implies $L^sigma = K(alpha + alpha^-1)$.
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
Since $alpha$ satisfies the quadratic $T^2-T(alpha + alpha^-1) + 1$, we have that $[K(alpha) : K(alpha + alpha^-1)] le 2$. Thus, $[K(alpha + alpha^-1) : K] ge n/2$.
The tower $L^sigma/K(alpha + alpha^-1) /K$ with $[L^sigma:K] = n/2$ now implies $L^sigma = K(alpha + alpha^-1)$.
Since $alpha$ satisfies the quadratic $T^2-T(alpha + alpha^-1) + 1$, we have that $[K(alpha) : K(alpha + alpha^-1)] le 2$. Thus, $[K(alpha + alpha^-1) : K] ge n/2$.
The tower $L^sigma/K(alpha + alpha^-1) /K$ with $[L^sigma:K] = n/2$ now implies $L^sigma = K(alpha + alpha^-1)$.
answered Aug 10 at 20:26
Sameer Kailasa
5,33121743
5,33121743
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
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
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2878766%2fif-k-alpha-k-is-galois-and-exists-sigma-in-g-such-that-sigma-alpha-a%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
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
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
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
1
It's not? If $beta=sum c_ialpha^iin L$ then don't we have $sigma^2beta=sigma(sum c_ialpha^-i)=sum c_ialpha^i=beta$?
â Arbutus
Aug 10 at 20:24
1
I'm sorry, I forgot that $L=K(alpha)$. If $L$ is not generated by just $alpha$ alone, then $sigma$ can have a higher even order. That's why I deleted the comment.
â Batominovski
Aug 10 at 20:30