Exploration 8: Galois theory
December 12, 2023.Questions:
- Which polynomial equations can be solved?
In the finite fields exploration, we’ve seen that given the finite field of prime order , taking the quotient by an irreducible polynomial of degree gives you the finite field of prime power order .
We’ve also seen that quotienting by an irreducible polynomial is equivalent to adjoining a root of that irreducible polynomial . In other words, if you extend a finite field by an algebraic element , then has its order raised to the th power, where is the degree of the minimal polynomial of .
So we have two notions of field extension that are equivalent:
- We can quotient its polynomial ring by a degree irreducible polynomial, or
- we can adjoin an algebraic element whose minimal polynomial is degree .
For simplicity, we might want to just refer to the field extension that raises its order by . Call that a degree extension, and we denote degree with . Then the degree of an algebraic element is the degree of its minimal polynomial.
Note that this notion of degree carries over to infinite fields too. Although a degree extension of an infinite field results in a field that is just as infinite, the idea is that every element in the new field is a -tuple of elements in the original field. TODO describe finite fields as tuples
and the degree of a simple extension be the degree of its primitive element . We can also define the degree of a finite field extension in general: decompose it into a composition of simple extensions by algebraic elements, and multiply the degrees of each simple extension.
Using the concept of the degree of an extension, we can start classifying some field extensions.
- If is degree , its minimal polynomial is .
- We can show that
using the
first
ring isoomorphism theorem.
- The evaluation map at , , has a kernel consisting of all polynomials with as a root. In other words, all polynomials that have the factor , which is just the ideal .
- Since the evaluation map is surjective, .
- The theorem states that . In other words, .
Let’s explore the degree extensions.
The quadratic extensions
The canonical example of a degree extension, or a quadratic extension, is , which we proved a while ago.
Since degree extensions are formed by quotienting by a monic irreducible degree polynomial, the general form of a quadratic extension must be the quotient . We’ll now prove a theorem that simplifies this.
- By definition, quadratic extensions are extensions of degree . Since finite field extensions are quotients by a suitable irreducible polynomial of the same degree, the quotient can be used to represent any degree extension.
- You can always find the roots of
using the quadratic formula
.
- Since is in the denominator, this requires the field to not be of characteristic (otherwise and you can’t divide by zero).
- This means every root adjoined by quotienting by can be expressed in terms of elements of together with . Since , this means we need only adjoin a square root of an element in to add every root of , implying that .
- The minimal polynomial of is .
- Therefore, every quadratic extension is isomorphic to the quadratic extension . If we let , then this becomes , which is isomorphic to .
The implication is that every quadratic extension can be obtained by a square root of some element in the base field. So the general form of a quadratic extension is for some . Note that the proof implies that the roots of a quadratic extension are . Therefore the roots are symmetric in a sense – adding one root always adds the other root, because you can obtain it via .
Whenever two roots of the same irreducible polynomial can be expressed in terms of each other within the base field, we call them algebraic conjugates, or just conjugates. This generalizes the concept of complex conjugates in to any field extension by an algebraic element. In general, quadratic extensions always produce two conjugate roots, but larger extensions might have a larger set of roots (that are all conjugate to each other). We’ll see an example now.
The cyclotomic extensions
A th root of unity is primitive if it can be used to express all the other th roots of unity. This is true whenever is coprime to .
The th cyclotomic polynomial, , is the minimal polynomial over for any primitive th root of unity . It’s irreducible and unique by definition of minimal polynomial, therefore we can use it to write the th cyclotomic extension .
- First of all it is clear that all primitive th roots of unity share the same minimal polynomial (), and are therefore roots of .
- Now we need to show these are the only roots of . To do this, we make a degree argument.
- First, note that the polynomial contains all th roots of unity, not just the primitive ones. Since every th root of unity is a primitive th root of unity for some divisor of , and (by virtue of containing all th roots of unity) must contain all these primitive th roots of unity for each , we can conclude that each is a factor of . This includes .
- Second, note that these are disjoint. If and share a root , then by definition both of those polynomials must be the minimal polynomial of . But minimal polynomials are unique, which implies .
- This proves the identity .
- Finally, note that if any root of is not a primitive th root of unity, then it must be a primitive th root of unity for some . But then and would share a root , which contradicts the fact that each is disjoint. Thus the only roots of are all the primitive th roots of unity .
Since primitive th roots of unity, by definition, can express all the th roots of unity, adding one root adds them all. In other words, the roots of are conjugate. Like the quadratic extensions, the cyclotomic extensions are an example of where all of the roots of the minimal polynomial are conjugate.
Since there are primitive th roots of unity, cyclotomic extensions are degree . Note that when is prime, then , and thus th cyclotomic extensions are always of degree .
In this section, we discover properties of conjugate roots.
In both quadratic and cyclotomic extensions, all the roots we adjoined were conjugate to each other.
In general, not all roots adjoined by a field extension are conjugate to each other. One case is when a field extension is made up of multiple extensions. For example, a biquadratic extension consists of two different quadratic extensions where there is no such that . That last condition ensures that and cannot be expressed in terms of the other in the base field . This means we’ve added the roots (which are conjugates) and (which are conjugates), but is not conjugate to .
Here’s a more concrete example. Over , take the splitting field of , whose roots could be expressed as , , and . Taking will give us one of the roots — perhaps — but not the others. In order to split , we must add one of the remaining roots, say . Note that each of these three roots can be expressed with the other two:
So we only need to adjoin two of the roots in order to split . Unlike the previous example, where taking a single quotient was enough to split , taking a single quotient is not enough to create the splitting field of , since it only adds one root. We can distinguish these two types of extensions.
Define a normal extension as a field extension of such that is the splitting field for some polynomial over . Then is clearly normal, since it’s the splitting field of . To show that is not normal, we rely on the following theorem:
- If is normal, then by definition is the splitting field for some polynomial over .
- Any polynomial irreducible over with a root in is a factor of , since (being the splitting field of ) adds only roots of and nothing more.
- But since splits in its splitting field , any factor of splits in , therefore splits in .
Corollary: By the contrapositive, if some polynomial irreducible over with a root in doesn’t split in , then is not normal.
So to prove an extension is normal, we need to show that it is the splitting field for some polynomial over . To prove an extension not normal, we need to show that it doesn’t split some polynomial irreducible over with a root in . Since doesn’t split but contains one of its roots, is not normal.
Normal extensions are interesting because they have the following property that we like to have:
By the previous theorem, if contains a root , then it splits its minimal polynomial . Therefore it contains all the roots of , which are the conjugate roots of .
We’ll see the implications of this property in the next section.
If we work with splitting fields, which are always normal extensions by definition, then we can always assume the following:
- Splitting fields are normal by definition of normal definitions being splitting fields. Thus it contains all conjugates.
- Splitting fields are finite since they need only add finitely many roots to split a finite polynomial, and all field extensions in characteristic are separable. Being finite separable means the splitting fields in characteristic are simple extensions . Since splitting fields are normal, generates every root (not just some roots) of every irreducible polynomial over whose roots are in .
- Such extensions (finite separable and normal) are known as Galois extensions, and they have some very interesting properties which we will explore in the next section.
In this section, we explore the intermediate fields of a Galois extension.
Again, consider the splitting field of : . The intermediate fields of refers to all the subfields of that contain (including and ). It turns out that has six intermediate fields:
The basic idea is that you can try to adjoin every combination of elements in not in , i.e. every expression composed of the roots adjoined. The intermediate fields are the result. Unfortunately, there are infinite possibilities of what to adjoin, and adjoining one set of elements often gives you the same field as adjoining a different set of elements. In general, finding intermediate fields is highly non-trivial without the tools we’re about to present.
The main way we define intermediate fields of is by defining -automorphisms, automorphisms that fix .
- All automorphisms fix the identities
and
.
So to prove the fixed elements of
form a subfield of
,
we just check that they contain all additive inverses, all nonzero
multiplicative inverses, and are closed under addition and
multiplication.
- Inverses: and for nonzero ,
- Closure: and
- Since all -automorphisms fix by definition, is included in the fixed elements, which we just proved is a subfield of . That means the fixed elements must form an intermediate field of .
This means the task of finding intermediate fields of can be reduced to the task of identifying -automorphisms of .
-automorphisms have a number of properties that we can leverage in order to find them. First of all:
We have already proved this for the case that is a simple extension of . Since the Primitive Element Theorem guarantees that all finite separable extensions are simple, the proof extends to all finite separable extensions.
Corollary: As all automorphisms are permutations of the given field, -automorphisms are exactly permutations that only permute roots of the given field extension.
Corollary: Since normal extensions contain all conjugate roots, -automorphisms of a normal extension represents a permutation of all roots adjoined to .
Corollary: Consider Galois extensions, which are normal and also separable (the roots adjoined to them are all distinct). This means that unique permutations on those roots correspond to unique -automorphisms.
Thus for non-Galois extensions it is possible that two distinct -automorphisms correspond to the same intermediate field, but for Galois extensions we can simply identify all permutations on roots to identify all -automorphisms and therefore all intermediate fields. This is the goal of the next section.
Side note: the reason normal extensions are called normal is the same reason normal subgroups are called normal subgroups – their -automorphisms happen to be invariant under conjugation.
- First of all, since each of fix , the composition fixes as well.
- Second, since each of are automorphisms in a normal extension, they represent permutations on the roots of polynomials.
- Permutations compose, so the composition also permutes the roots of polynomials, and is thus a -automorphism of .
In this section, we identify the permutations on roots of a field extension.
The last corollary showed that for Galois extensions, we can count the number of -automorphisms by counting the number of permutations of the roots in . Define the Galois group of an extension as the set of all -automorphisms on , which represent permutations on the roots adjoined to . These permutations form a group, since you can always invert a permutation, and the composition of two permutations is a permutation and is an associative operation, and there is an identity permutation that swaps no roots.
Here are some theorems about Galois groups and extensions which we’ll use later:
- The order of is precisely the number of -automorphisms of .
- Recall that a Galois extension is finite separable, and therefore has a primitive element (which is a root). Since every root adjoined to can be expressed in terms of the primitive element , each -automorphism is characterized by where it sends .
- Since is normal, every root of is in and can be mapped to (i.e. are candidates for ). Since is separable, these roots are distinct. Thus there are possible -automorphisms, one for each of the distinct roots of .
- In other words, the order of the Galois group is equal to the degree of , which is the degree of by definition.
If and are roots of , then and are isomorphic. But this isomorphism is an -automorphism in the splitting field , since it fixes and swaps and . Therefore there is indeed a -automorphism in that maps arbitrary to arbitrary .
- Lemma 1: If is normal, then for any intermediate field , is normal.
, being normal, is the splitting field for some polynomial over . Since it is a splitting field, is already the minimal field containing together with the roots of . Then is also the minimal field containing any intermediate field of together with the roots of , meaning it is also the splitting field for over , and thus is normal.
- Lemma 2: If is separable, then for any intermediate field , is separable.
- Recall that an extension is separable if every element of is the root of a separable polynomial over . Recall that a separable polynomial has no repeated roots.
- Every minimal polynomial over is potentially of lesser degree than the corresponding minimal polynomial over , due to containing more roots than . Thus, divides over .
- That means every root of is a root of . That implies that is has distinct roots, has distinct roots too. So separable polynomials in are also separable polynomials in .
- is separable, so every element of is a root of some separable polynomial over , which we just showed are also separable polynomials over , implying that is separable.
- A Galois extension is one that is normal and separable. If is normal and separable, then is normal by Lemma 1, and separable by Lemma 2, thus Galois.
Recall that quadratic extensions (degree Galois extensions) are always obtainable by adjoining a square root. We can generalize this to prime degree Galois extensions. It turns out that, like quadratic extensions, they are always obtainable by adjoining a th root, provided that the base field contains the th roots of unity. This last requirement was not necessary for quadratic extensions, since the nd roots of unity are and , which always exist.
- Quadratic extensions are always expressible by adjoining a square root. Thus they are simple extensions, and simple extensions are finite and separable.
- Degree is the minimum degree required to split an irreducible quadratic polynomial. Since every irreducible with a root in the quadratic extension must split in the extension, quadratic extensions are normal.
- So quadratic extensions are finite separable and normal, meaning they’re Galois extensions.
- ()
If
is Galois of degree
,
then
for some
th
root
of an element in
.
- Since is Galois of degree , its Galois group is cyclic with a generator .
- Since , is not the identity. Therefore there must be some element not fixed by . Let be the minimal polynomial of .
- The orbit of under contains all the roots of , since must act transitively on the roots of . Since is separable, these roots are distinct, and therefore there are roots.
- As is a degree irreducible polynomial in a field containing the th roots of unity, it must be the polynomial for some . This implies is a th root.
- Since every root is expressible in terms of , is a splitting field of . But since is normal, is also a splitting field of containing the exact same roots. Thus they must be the same field: (not merely an isomorphism)
- Thus is obtained by adjoining a th root.
- ()
If
for some
th
root
of an element
in
,
then
is Galois of degree
.
- is a root of its minimal polynomial , and therefore is a th root of . We can write the th roots of as , and they are all in since we assume . Thus splits in .
- The derivative of is . Assuming we’re not in characteristic , shares no roots with its derivative and is therefore separable.
- Any polynomial with a root in can express that root in terms of , since is simple. Since the minimal polynomial of splits in into distinct roots, any polynomial with a root in must split in as well into distinct roots. Therefore, is normal and separable and therefore Galois. Since is the minimal polynomial of and is of degree , is of degree .
Such extensions are Kummer extensions, characterized by the fact that if a field contains the th roots of unity, you can obtain a degree Galois extension by adjoining any th root that isn’t in the base field. This is a generalization of quadratic extensions (where ), in which you obtain a degree Galois extension by adjoining any square root not in the base field.
In this section, we generalize a correspondence between the Galois group of an extension and its intermediate fields.
Let’s revisit the intermediate fields of the splitting field of :
It turns out the Galois group for this extension is the symmetric group . Now notice how the subgroup diagram of below looks exactly like the intermediate field diagram above, but flipped upside-down:
In fact, the subgroups of directly correspond a set of permutations of the three roots of . The correspondence between subgroups of and the corresponding intermediate field is that each intermediate field contains all the elements that are fixed by every -automorphism in the corresponding subgroup of the Galois group . Call the fixed field of .
- Since and are fields and therefore integral domains, their subring is also an integral domain.
- All that is left is to show every nonzero element of has a multiplicative inverse. But since and both have the same multiplicative inverses for all their nonzero elements, so does .
We already know that a single -automorphism defines an intermediate field of . A subgroup containing multiple -automorphisms will fix elements corresponding to the intersection of the fixed elements of each individual -automorphism. Being an intersection of subfields of , must be a subfield of each of those subfields, and is therefore also a subfield of containing (i.e. an intermediate field of .)
This is enough to prove that in general, the intermediate fields of a Galois extension correspond to the subfields of the Galois group.
First, for every intermediate field , we can identify the permutations of that fix , which is the Galois group . Call this map .
Second, for every subgroup , we can identify the elements of fixed by every permutation in , which is its fixed field . Call this map .
The theorem states that and are inverses. In other words, the subset relations below are actually equalities:
This essentially only requires us to prove two things:
For : we must have .
- Let . Recall that is exactly all the automorphisms of that fix . This is a subgroup of .
- Since is finite and separable, it has a primitive element . Let be its minimal polynomial.
- Apply the orbit-stabilizer theorem on the action of on the roots of . The orbit-stabilizer theorem states that the size of the orbit of is equal to the size of the group divided by the size of the stabilizer of : . Choosing as a primitive element makes it so its stabilizer is trivial, since if an automorphism fixes , it fixes the whole extension.
- We know that , therefore the order of matches the order of the orbit of . We just need to show that there are elements in the orbit of .
- Since the minimal polynomial of is irreducible over , its Galois group acts transitively on its roots. Therefore all of its roots are in the orbit of . Since is separable, the roots are distinct, meaning the number of roots is equal to the degree of the extension.
For : we must have .
- Since is an intermediate field of , we know is Galois, and therefore .
- The automorphisms of that fix the fixed group of are exactly , so by definition. Therefore .
Because of this fundamental correspondence, the arduous task of studying the intermediate fields of a Galois extension can be reduced to the much simpler tasks of studying the subgroups of its Galois group.
Recall that all splitting fields in characteristic are Galois extensions. Since each splitting field is defined over an irreducible polynomial, we can assign to each irreducible polynomial the Galois group of its splitting field. In fact, you can go to this website to look up the Galois group of every irreducible polynomial in !
< Back to category Exploration 8: Galois theory (permalink)Exploration 7: Fields