These are hard to compute for general polynomials, but there is a formula for cubics and for polynomials of the form .
The following document is helpful for the exam: transitive subgroups of , and .
cycle type | 1 | 2 | (2,2) | 3 | (2,3) | 4 | 5 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 4 | ||||||
1 | 5 | 4 | |||||
1 | 5 | 10 | 4 | ||||
1 | 15 | 20 | 24 | ||||
1 | 10 | 15 | 20 | 20 | 30 | 24 |
See the following document for a better table: cycle types
This Stack Exchange post lists a smorgasboard of methods used for finding Galois groups over . Here's one that they don't talk about:
Solution. The primitive element theorem says that all finite separable field extensions are simple; hence we cannot consider finite field extensions of characteristic 0 field nor of finite fields.
Set and . Then . Now take an arbitrary rational function . Raising to the th power leaves the coefficients of fixed while swapping for and for , hence and so . This means is not simple.
2016 January problem 1 part d (long computation)
2016 August problem 2 (not typed)
2016 August problem 3
2017 January problem 1,2 (done on paper, not typed)
2017 January problem 3 a: who irreducibility (on paper no typed)
Problem: Let be the field of rational numbers and a primitive 9-th root of unity in an algebraic closure of .
Show that has a subfield with Galois of degree 3.
Find a polynomial of degree and integer coefficients whose splitting field is .
Let be a prime and of degree and non-zero discriminant such that . Show that if then has all its roots in .
Solution to (1): The th cyclotomic extension has Galois group , so has Galois group . There are integers between and coprime to , hence has order . The only groups of order 6 are and , and since isn't Abelian, . The subgroup
Solution to (2): We solve this problem in two parts: we find a primitive element for and then we find its minimal polynomial. Whatever the primitive element of is, it must be a polynomial in . Hence it makes sense to start looking for polynomials in which are fixed by , the subgroup of which fixes . The group consists of the identity and an involution which sends . An obvious candidate primitive element for , therefore, is , as this is fixed exactly when is fixed or sent to . Our hypothesis is therefore
Solution to (3): A polynomial has nonzero discriminant if and only if it is separable; so is separable. The statement that means we should keep from the previous parts in mind as we solve this. This insight, together with the fact that one of the given hypotheses involves the number 9, indicates that we should consider the cyclotomic extension .
Assume now that . Squaring both sides gives us , which implies that . Using the general fact that , we have the following chain of divisions:
Solution: Let be the Galois closure of over . By the primitive element theorem we know that for some algebraic over with its minimal polynomial. Then and is the splitting field of ( is separable by virtue of the fact that , hence we need only adjoin the remaining roots of to ensure the extension is Galois). This implies .
Every subfield of must be contain , and hence also contains . The number of subfields of is therefore bounded by the number of subfields of containing , which in turn is equal to the number of subgroups of by the Galois correspondence. The number of subgroups is certainly bounded by the number of subsets, which is . Hence the number of subfields of is at most .
Suppose now that . For each , is a subfield of . There are possible choices for , and hence by the pigeonhole principle and our above bound, there must exist distinct integers and between and such that . This then implies that
Problem: Consider . Observe that has 4 distinct roots: where and .
Determine the degree of the splitting field of over .
Prove that is isomorphic to the dihedral group of order .
Determine a primitive generator of .
Determine all the subfields of and identify the ones that are Galois over
Solution to (a): Note first that since is irreducible by Eisenstein's criterion. The field clearly does not contain , hence the factorization of into irreducibles over is . Thus (implying that is purely imaginary) and has minimal polynomial over . This means
Solution to (b): The Galois action on the roots of is transitive since is irreducible[1]. This means is isomorphic to one of the five transitive subgroups of : itself, , the dihedral group of order 8 , the Klein 4 group or . These last two groups are of order 4 while the first two are order and respectively. Since , we conclude , the dihedral group of order 8.
Solution to (c): Recall that . Since is a finite Galois extension, the proof of the primitive element theorem demonstrates that there is some integer such that is primitive in [2]. We therefore need only identify an element of the form which isn't fixed by any element of .
Since , an automorphism is entirely determined by the image of and . Since is determined by , if we choose first there are only two choices remaining for . Keeping this in mind, we can easily see that choosing does the trick by examining a few cases.
Note first that fixes precisely when
Case 1: . Then , so
Case 2: . Then and
Case 3: . Then or , and in either case,
This shows that isn't fixed by any element of , and hence .
Solution to (d): As far as I am aware, the best way to proceed here is in the obvious way: compute the subgroup lattice of and determine which subgroups are normal. I haven't finished typing this answer up yet.
[1] | This follows from the fact that if and are any two roots of an irreducible polynomial over a field , then via the map . |
[2] | The proof of the primitive element theorem for infinite fields can be reduced to the case of , in which case, one can show that there exist distinct elements such that . It readily follows that is a primitive generator for . |
Solution. Let for convenience. If were not irreducible then it would factor as the product of either two quadratics or a linear and a cubic. I don't see a better way to approach this other than by examining these two cases separately; generalized Eisenstein's criterion fails under all tricks I tried. Note that for all since .
Case 1: Suppose for some . Then
,
,
and
.
However, is not a fourth root in , so this is impossible.
Case 2: To arrive at a contradiction this time, we'll need to resort to using the valuation on . Suppose then that that for some , so
.
.
. One can show that the only cube root of in is itself, since and is irreducible over .
Comparing degrees we get , so and hence . This is impossible. Hence is irreducible over .
Notice that is separable since , and thus its splitting field – call it K – is indeed a Galois extension.
Proof. Our strategy will first be to find a degree 5 Galois extension . By the Fundamental Theorem of Galois theory is necessarily the splitting field of some polynomial over , and because is necessarily simply by the primitive element theorem, it is in particular the splitting field of some degree 5 polynomial over . Thus, we first find Galois extension of degree 5 and then identify the minimal polynomial of .
Recall that every finite Abelian group is the subgroup of some cyclotomic extension of and let be a primitive th root of unity. It is a standard result that . Furthermore, if is an Abelian group whose order is divisible by a prime , then contains a copy of . This means we need only find such that has order divisible by . Taking works: in this case
Here's the pdf. I believe this is an abnormally easy exam.
Proof. The TLDR; is that these fields are not isomorphic because . Does not contain a number which squares to .
Suppose we had an isomorphism . Then there is some such that
Proof.
Proof.
Problem: Let be a field.
Show that the fraction field of the power series ring is the Laurent series ring
Show that the fraction field of is strictly smaller than .
Proof.
Problem: Prove that the following polynomials are irreducible over the indicated fields, and determine their Galois groups:
over the ground field .
over the ground field .
Solution to (a): Notice
Now let's compute the Galois group of . The transitive subgroups of are are and , so these are the only possibilities. Recall that the discriminant of a polynomial of the form is given by . This means the discriminant of is . Neither of these factors is a square in , hence is not square and so the Galois group of is .
Let's now show that is irreducible. If it wasn't, then it'd have a root in and would thus factor as for some .
Solution to (b): See this Stack Exchange post for additional thoughts. Irreducibility is easy here, simply apply Eisenstein's criterion to . There are five transitive subgroups of which gives us five possibilities for the Galois group :
5-cycle: All possibilities for are groups with order divisible by 5, hence contains an element of order . This implies that there is a 5-cycle in
2-cycle: Identifying the number or real and complex roots is profitable here. Differentiating, we see that , which is zero at the th roots of . Only two of these are real, so has only two critical points. Checking the second derivative reveals that one of these is a local minimum and the other a local maximum , so changes direction times and hence has at most real roots. Indeed, checking a few values reveals that crosses the -axis times (, , and ). Hence has real roots , , and complex roots and .
Let be the splitting field of and let be the field obtained by adjoining all the real roots to . Then , hence the subgroup of which fixes is order , hence contains a 2-cycle.
Conclusion:
Remark: In part (b) of the above problem, it might seem natural to examine the factorization of modulo primes which don't divide the discriminant. Proceeding in this way would result in a time consuming slog and would look something like this:
Calculate the discriminant. Using for polynomials of the form , we get . This isn't divisible by 3 or 5, so selecting seems like a good choice.
Factor modulo . Doing this for will show after a bit of slogging that is irreducible modulo 3. Thus contains a 5-cycle, which we already knew.
Factor modulo . We would find that has only one root in , meaning it factors as the product of a linear polynomial with a quadric. This means it has cycle type or . Out of all transitive subgroups of only has a cycle of type and only and have -cycles. However, deciding whether or not the quadric in the factorization of is reducible or not is quite difficult.
Before embarking in this lengthy, time-consuming process, it's profitable (and quick) to analyze the real and complex roots of . Sometimes it's enough to compute the Galois group.