Short proof of $mathbbQ[x,y]/langle x^2+1, y^4-2rangle equivmathbbQ[sqrt[4]2, i]$

Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I am looking for an indirect proof of $$E = mathbbQ[x,y]/_langle x^2+1, y^4-2ranglecongmathbbQ[sqrt[4]2, i],$$ much preferably using module homomorphism theorems.
To be more specific, above problem was part of a multi-part, algebra qual problem determining Galois group of $x^4-2$ over $mathbbQ.$ I can establish the above equivalence by identifying an explicit isomorphism $phi$ defined by: $phi(X)=i$ and $phi(Y) = sqrt[4]2$ by manually checking that this is indeed an isomorphism, where $X,Y$ are the equivalence classes of $x,y$ in $E.$
But I feel like there must be some slick ring/module theory proof using homomorphism theorems and maybe other theorems about prime/maximal ideals.
abstract-algebra ring-theory modules galois-theory ring-homomorphism
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I am looking for an indirect proof of $$E = mathbbQ[x,y]/_langle x^2+1, y^4-2ranglecongmathbbQ[sqrt[4]2, i],$$ much preferably using module homomorphism theorems.
To be more specific, above problem was part of a multi-part, algebra qual problem determining Galois group of $x^4-2$ over $mathbbQ.$ I can establish the above equivalence by identifying an explicit isomorphism $phi$ defined by: $phi(X)=i$ and $phi(Y) = sqrt[4]2$ by manually checking that this is indeed an isomorphism, where $X,Y$ are the equivalence classes of $x,y$ in $E.$
But I feel like there must be some slick ring/module theory proof using homomorphism theorems and maybe other theorems about prime/maximal ideals.
abstract-algebra ring-theory modules galois-theory ring-homomorphism
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I am looking for an indirect proof of $$E = mathbbQ[x,y]/_langle x^2+1, y^4-2ranglecongmathbbQ[sqrt[4]2, i],$$ much preferably using module homomorphism theorems.
To be more specific, above problem was part of a multi-part, algebra qual problem determining Galois group of $x^4-2$ over $mathbbQ.$ I can establish the above equivalence by identifying an explicit isomorphism $phi$ defined by: $phi(X)=i$ and $phi(Y) = sqrt[4]2$ by manually checking that this is indeed an isomorphism, where $X,Y$ are the equivalence classes of $x,y$ in $E.$
But I feel like there must be some slick ring/module theory proof using homomorphism theorems and maybe other theorems about prime/maximal ideals.
abstract-algebra ring-theory modules galois-theory ring-homomorphism
I am looking for an indirect proof of $$E = mathbbQ[x,y]/_langle x^2+1, y^4-2ranglecongmathbbQ[sqrt[4]2, i],$$ much preferably using module homomorphism theorems.
To be more specific, above problem was part of a multi-part, algebra qual problem determining Galois group of $x^4-2$ over $mathbbQ.$ I can establish the above equivalence by identifying an explicit isomorphism $phi$ defined by: $phi(X)=i$ and $phi(Y) = sqrt[4]2$ by manually checking that this is indeed an isomorphism, where $X,Y$ are the equivalence classes of $x,y$ in $E.$
But I feel like there must be some slick ring/module theory proof using homomorphism theorems and maybe other theorems about prime/maximal ideals.
abstract-algebra ring-theory modules galois-theory ring-homomorphism
edited Aug 18 at 5:13
asked Aug 16 at 3:12
dezdichado
5,4251828
5,4251828
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
6
down vote
Looks like you got it all right. I might organize the details as follows:
- Given a field $K$, an extension field $L$, and a point $(a,b)in L^2$, evaluating a polynomial gives a homomorphism of rings $phi:K[x,y]to L, f(x,y)mapsto f(a,b)$.
- By the first isomorphism theorem we get an isomorphism of rings $$K[x,y]/operatornameKer(phi)simeq operatornameIm(phi).$$
- We apply this to $K=BbbQ$, $L=K(i,root4of2)$, $a=i,b=root4of2$.
- As an integral domain, f.d. over $K$, we see that $operatornameIm(phi)$ is a field. Because it contains $i$ and $root4of2$ it must be all of $L$. In this step we can also appeal to $L/K$ being algebraic, also allowing us to conclude that $phi$ is surjective.
- By Eisenstein $[K(root4of2):K]=4$. Because $K(root4of2)$ is a real field $[L:K(root4of2)]=2$. Therefore $[L:K]=8$.
- Clearly $x^2+1$ and $y^4-2$ are both in $operatornameKer(phi)$. Denote the ideal of $K[x,y]$ they generate by $I$. It is easy to see that $K[x,y]/I$ is spanned, as a vector space over $K$, by the cosets of $x^my^n, 0le m<2, 0le n<4$. Replace higher powers of $x$ or $y$ in the obvious way.
- We know that $K[x,y]/operatornameKer(phi)$ is 8-dimensional, and that $Isubseteq operatornameKer(phi)$, so there is no wiggle room. We must have $I=operatornameKer(phi)$.
Nothing much to it. Variations are possible, my habit is to reduce it to first principles.
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
In short, we will show that the left side is a field and can then check directly that both fields are a splitting field of the same polynomial.
Consider the proof of the existence of a splitting filed. Start with $F_0=F$ and $p(x) in F[x]$. Then, take one of the irreducible polynomials that divides it (say $f_1(x)$) and then make the field extension $F_1 = F[x]/(f_1(x))/F$. The polynomial will have at least one linear factor, and you can work with a lower degree polynomial. Then you proceed by induction. If we do this explicitly for the polynomial $(t^2+1)(t^4-2) in BbbQ[t]$ one way of going about this is to get $F_1 = BbbQ[x]/(x^2+1)$ and $F_2 = F_1[y]/(y^4-2)$ (Note: In the first one, the ideal is generated in $BbbQ$ and in the second one, the ideal is generated in $F_1$). This ring will be isomorphic to $BbbQ[x,y]/(x^2+1,y^4-2)$ meaning that it is a field. You can then check directly that both $BbbQ[x,y]/(x^2+1,y^4-2)$ and $mathbbQ(sqrt[4]2, i)$ are splitting fields of $(t^2+1)(t^4-2)$ meaning that they are isomorphic (For the left side, you will get that the roots are $pm X, pm Y$, and $pm XY$ and that when you adjoin them, you get the whole field).
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
6
down vote
Looks like you got it all right. I might organize the details as follows:
- Given a field $K$, an extension field $L$, and a point $(a,b)in L^2$, evaluating a polynomial gives a homomorphism of rings $phi:K[x,y]to L, f(x,y)mapsto f(a,b)$.
- By the first isomorphism theorem we get an isomorphism of rings $$K[x,y]/operatornameKer(phi)simeq operatornameIm(phi).$$
- We apply this to $K=BbbQ$, $L=K(i,root4of2)$, $a=i,b=root4of2$.
- As an integral domain, f.d. over $K$, we see that $operatornameIm(phi)$ is a field. Because it contains $i$ and $root4of2$ it must be all of $L$. In this step we can also appeal to $L/K$ being algebraic, also allowing us to conclude that $phi$ is surjective.
- By Eisenstein $[K(root4of2):K]=4$. Because $K(root4of2)$ is a real field $[L:K(root4of2)]=2$. Therefore $[L:K]=8$.
- Clearly $x^2+1$ and $y^4-2$ are both in $operatornameKer(phi)$. Denote the ideal of $K[x,y]$ they generate by $I$. It is easy to see that $K[x,y]/I$ is spanned, as a vector space over $K$, by the cosets of $x^my^n, 0le m<2, 0le n<4$. Replace higher powers of $x$ or $y$ in the obvious way.
- We know that $K[x,y]/operatornameKer(phi)$ is 8-dimensional, and that $Isubseteq operatornameKer(phi)$, so there is no wiggle room. We must have $I=operatornameKer(phi)$.
Nothing much to it. Variations are possible, my habit is to reduce it to first principles.
add a comment |Â
up vote
6
down vote
Looks like you got it all right. I might organize the details as follows:
- Given a field $K$, an extension field $L$, and a point $(a,b)in L^2$, evaluating a polynomial gives a homomorphism of rings $phi:K[x,y]to L, f(x,y)mapsto f(a,b)$.
- By the first isomorphism theorem we get an isomorphism of rings $$K[x,y]/operatornameKer(phi)simeq operatornameIm(phi).$$
- We apply this to $K=BbbQ$, $L=K(i,root4of2)$, $a=i,b=root4of2$.
- As an integral domain, f.d. over $K$, we see that $operatornameIm(phi)$ is a field. Because it contains $i$ and $root4of2$ it must be all of $L$. In this step we can also appeal to $L/K$ being algebraic, also allowing us to conclude that $phi$ is surjective.
- By Eisenstein $[K(root4of2):K]=4$. Because $K(root4of2)$ is a real field $[L:K(root4of2)]=2$. Therefore $[L:K]=8$.
- Clearly $x^2+1$ and $y^4-2$ are both in $operatornameKer(phi)$. Denote the ideal of $K[x,y]$ they generate by $I$. It is easy to see that $K[x,y]/I$ is spanned, as a vector space over $K$, by the cosets of $x^my^n, 0le m<2, 0le n<4$. Replace higher powers of $x$ or $y$ in the obvious way.
- We know that $K[x,y]/operatornameKer(phi)$ is 8-dimensional, and that $Isubseteq operatornameKer(phi)$, so there is no wiggle room. We must have $I=operatornameKer(phi)$.
Nothing much to it. Variations are possible, my habit is to reduce it to first principles.
add a comment |Â
up vote
6
down vote
up vote
6
down vote
Looks like you got it all right. I might organize the details as follows:
- Given a field $K$, an extension field $L$, and a point $(a,b)in L^2$, evaluating a polynomial gives a homomorphism of rings $phi:K[x,y]to L, f(x,y)mapsto f(a,b)$.
- By the first isomorphism theorem we get an isomorphism of rings $$K[x,y]/operatornameKer(phi)simeq operatornameIm(phi).$$
- We apply this to $K=BbbQ$, $L=K(i,root4of2)$, $a=i,b=root4of2$.
- As an integral domain, f.d. over $K$, we see that $operatornameIm(phi)$ is a field. Because it contains $i$ and $root4of2$ it must be all of $L$. In this step we can also appeal to $L/K$ being algebraic, also allowing us to conclude that $phi$ is surjective.
- By Eisenstein $[K(root4of2):K]=4$. Because $K(root4of2)$ is a real field $[L:K(root4of2)]=2$. Therefore $[L:K]=8$.
- Clearly $x^2+1$ and $y^4-2$ are both in $operatornameKer(phi)$. Denote the ideal of $K[x,y]$ they generate by $I$. It is easy to see that $K[x,y]/I$ is spanned, as a vector space over $K$, by the cosets of $x^my^n, 0le m<2, 0le n<4$. Replace higher powers of $x$ or $y$ in the obvious way.
- We know that $K[x,y]/operatornameKer(phi)$ is 8-dimensional, and that $Isubseteq operatornameKer(phi)$, so there is no wiggle room. We must have $I=operatornameKer(phi)$.
Nothing much to it. Variations are possible, my habit is to reduce it to first principles.
Looks like you got it all right. I might organize the details as follows:
- Given a field $K$, an extension field $L$, and a point $(a,b)in L^2$, evaluating a polynomial gives a homomorphism of rings $phi:K[x,y]to L, f(x,y)mapsto f(a,b)$.
- By the first isomorphism theorem we get an isomorphism of rings $$K[x,y]/operatornameKer(phi)simeq operatornameIm(phi).$$
- We apply this to $K=BbbQ$, $L=K(i,root4of2)$, $a=i,b=root4of2$.
- As an integral domain, f.d. over $K$, we see that $operatornameIm(phi)$ is a field. Because it contains $i$ and $root4of2$ it must be all of $L$. In this step we can also appeal to $L/K$ being algebraic, also allowing us to conclude that $phi$ is surjective.
- By Eisenstein $[K(root4of2):K]=4$. Because $K(root4of2)$ is a real field $[L:K(root4of2)]=2$. Therefore $[L:K]=8$.
- Clearly $x^2+1$ and $y^4-2$ are both in $operatornameKer(phi)$. Denote the ideal of $K[x,y]$ they generate by $I$. It is easy to see that $K[x,y]/I$ is spanned, as a vector space over $K$, by the cosets of $x^my^n, 0le m<2, 0le n<4$. Replace higher powers of $x$ or $y$ in the obvious way.
- We know that $K[x,y]/operatornameKer(phi)$ is 8-dimensional, and that $Isubseteq operatornameKer(phi)$, so there is no wiggle room. We must have $I=operatornameKer(phi)$.
Nothing much to it. Variations are possible, my habit is to reduce it to first principles.
answered Aug 16 at 3:52
community wiki
Jyrki Lahtonen
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
In short, we will show that the left side is a field and can then check directly that both fields are a splitting field of the same polynomial.
Consider the proof of the existence of a splitting filed. Start with $F_0=F$ and $p(x) in F[x]$. Then, take one of the irreducible polynomials that divides it (say $f_1(x)$) and then make the field extension $F_1 = F[x]/(f_1(x))/F$. The polynomial will have at least one linear factor, and you can work with a lower degree polynomial. Then you proceed by induction. If we do this explicitly for the polynomial $(t^2+1)(t^4-2) in BbbQ[t]$ one way of going about this is to get $F_1 = BbbQ[x]/(x^2+1)$ and $F_2 = F_1[y]/(y^4-2)$ (Note: In the first one, the ideal is generated in $BbbQ$ and in the second one, the ideal is generated in $F_1$). This ring will be isomorphic to $BbbQ[x,y]/(x^2+1,y^4-2)$ meaning that it is a field. You can then check directly that both $BbbQ[x,y]/(x^2+1,y^4-2)$ and $mathbbQ(sqrt[4]2, i)$ are splitting fields of $(t^2+1)(t^4-2)$ meaning that they are isomorphic (For the left side, you will get that the roots are $pm X, pm Y$, and $pm XY$ and that when you adjoin them, you get the whole field).
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
In short, we will show that the left side is a field and can then check directly that both fields are a splitting field of the same polynomial.
Consider the proof of the existence of a splitting filed. Start with $F_0=F$ and $p(x) in F[x]$. Then, take one of the irreducible polynomials that divides it (say $f_1(x)$) and then make the field extension $F_1 = F[x]/(f_1(x))/F$. The polynomial will have at least one linear factor, and you can work with a lower degree polynomial. Then you proceed by induction. If we do this explicitly for the polynomial $(t^2+1)(t^4-2) in BbbQ[t]$ one way of going about this is to get $F_1 = BbbQ[x]/(x^2+1)$ and $F_2 = F_1[y]/(y^4-2)$ (Note: In the first one, the ideal is generated in $BbbQ$ and in the second one, the ideal is generated in $F_1$). This ring will be isomorphic to $BbbQ[x,y]/(x^2+1,y^4-2)$ meaning that it is a field. You can then check directly that both $BbbQ[x,y]/(x^2+1,y^4-2)$ and $mathbbQ(sqrt[4]2, i)$ are splitting fields of $(t^2+1)(t^4-2)$ meaning that they are isomorphic (For the left side, you will get that the roots are $pm X, pm Y$, and $pm XY$ and that when you adjoin them, you get the whole field).
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
In short, we will show that the left side is a field and can then check directly that both fields are a splitting field of the same polynomial.
Consider the proof of the existence of a splitting filed. Start with $F_0=F$ and $p(x) in F[x]$. Then, take one of the irreducible polynomials that divides it (say $f_1(x)$) and then make the field extension $F_1 = F[x]/(f_1(x))/F$. The polynomial will have at least one linear factor, and you can work with a lower degree polynomial. Then you proceed by induction. If we do this explicitly for the polynomial $(t^2+1)(t^4-2) in BbbQ[t]$ one way of going about this is to get $F_1 = BbbQ[x]/(x^2+1)$ and $F_2 = F_1[y]/(y^4-2)$ (Note: In the first one, the ideal is generated in $BbbQ$ and in the second one, the ideal is generated in $F_1$). This ring will be isomorphic to $BbbQ[x,y]/(x^2+1,y^4-2)$ meaning that it is a field. You can then check directly that both $BbbQ[x,y]/(x^2+1,y^4-2)$ and $mathbbQ(sqrt[4]2, i)$ are splitting fields of $(t^2+1)(t^4-2)$ meaning that they are isomorphic (For the left side, you will get that the roots are $pm X, pm Y$, and $pm XY$ and that when you adjoin them, you get the whole field).
In short, we will show that the left side is a field and can then check directly that both fields are a splitting field of the same polynomial.
Consider the proof of the existence of a splitting filed. Start with $F_0=F$ and $p(x) in F[x]$. Then, take one of the irreducible polynomials that divides it (say $f_1(x)$) and then make the field extension $F_1 = F[x]/(f_1(x))/F$. The polynomial will have at least one linear factor, and you can work with a lower degree polynomial. Then you proceed by induction. If we do this explicitly for the polynomial $(t^2+1)(t^4-2) in BbbQ[t]$ one way of going about this is to get $F_1 = BbbQ[x]/(x^2+1)$ and $F_2 = F_1[y]/(y^4-2)$ (Note: In the first one, the ideal is generated in $BbbQ$ and in the second one, the ideal is generated in $F_1$). This ring will be isomorphic to $BbbQ[x,y]/(x^2+1,y^4-2)$ meaning that it is a field. You can then check directly that both $BbbQ[x,y]/(x^2+1,y^4-2)$ and $mathbbQ(sqrt[4]2, i)$ are splitting fields of $(t^2+1)(t^4-2)$ meaning that they are isomorphic (For the left side, you will get that the roots are $pm X, pm Y$, and $pm XY$ and that when you adjoin them, you get the whole field).
answered Aug 23 at 4:33
Jonathan Dunay
1,3131215
1,3131215
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%2f2884349%2fshort-proof-of-mathbbqx-y-langle-x21-y4-2-rangle-equiv-mathbbq-sq%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