$X^2-q in mathbb{Q}(sqrt{p})[X]$ is irreducible and $[mathbb{Q}(sqrt{p}, sqrt{q}): mathbb{Q}]=4$












1












$begingroup$


I don't know how to prove the following:



Let $p neq q$ be prime numbers, then $sqrt{p}, sqrt{q} in mathbb{R}$ and $mathbb{Q}(sqrt{p}),mathbb{Q}( sqrt{q}),mathbb{Q}(sqrt{p}, sqrt{q}) subset mathbb{R}$.



Show that $X^2-q in mathbb{Q}(sqrt{p})[X]$ is irreducible, $[mathbb{Q}(sqrt{p}, sqrt{q}): mathbb{Q}]=4$ and that $1, sqrt{p}, sqrt{q}, sqrt{pq}$ is a basis for $mathbb{Q}(sqrt{p}, sqrt{q})$.



I keep finding posts about Galois groups but we didn't introduce that concept yet.
Thanks in advance for any help.






abstract-algebra







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Should it say $mathbb{Q} (sqrt{p}) [X]$ in the title?
    $endgroup$
    – Rellek
    Dec 13 '18 at 22:35










  • $begingroup$
    Yes, you're right. I'll fix it, thank you.
    $endgroup$
    – Anzu
    Dec 13 '18 at 22:38










  • $begingroup$
    I assume that the paragraph starting "Let" is background, not something you want help proving, but that could be clearer. Then there are three subquestions: irreducibility, extension degree, and basis. Do you have any idea for how to tackle any of the three?
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Taylor
    Dec 13 '18 at 22:44










  • $begingroup$
    Yes, exactly. The first paragraph is given. It could have been clearer, my bad. Reliek's solution is comprehensible, it answers my questions.
    $endgroup$
    – Anzu
    Dec 13 '18 at 22:57
















1












$begingroup$


I don't know how to prove the following:



Let $p neq q$ be prime numbers, then $sqrt{p}, sqrt{q} in mathbb{R}$ and $mathbb{Q}(sqrt{p}),mathbb{Q}( sqrt{q}),mathbb{Q}(sqrt{p}, sqrt{q}) subset mathbb{R}$.



Show that $X^2-q in mathbb{Q}(sqrt{p})[X]$ is irreducible, $[mathbb{Q}(sqrt{p}, sqrt{q}): mathbb{Q}]=4$ and that $1, sqrt{p}, sqrt{q}, sqrt{pq}$ is a basis for $mathbb{Q}(sqrt{p}, sqrt{q})$.



I keep finding posts about Galois groups but we didn't introduce that concept yet.
Thanks in advance for any help.






abstract-algebra







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Should it say $mathbb{Q} (sqrt{p}) [X]$ in the title?
    $endgroup$
    – Rellek
    Dec 13 '18 at 22:35










  • $begingroup$
    Yes, you're right. I'll fix it, thank you.
    $endgroup$
    – Anzu
    Dec 13 '18 at 22:38










  • $begingroup$
    I assume that the paragraph starting "Let" is background, not something you want help proving, but that could be clearer. Then there are three subquestions: irreducibility, extension degree, and basis. Do you have any idea for how to tackle any of the three?
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Taylor
    Dec 13 '18 at 22:44










  • $begingroup$
    Yes, exactly. The first paragraph is given. It could have been clearer, my bad. Reliek's solution is comprehensible, it answers my questions.
    $endgroup$
    – Anzu
    Dec 13 '18 at 22:57














1












1








1


0



$begingroup$


I don't know how to prove the following:



Let $p neq q$ be prime numbers, then $sqrt{p}, sqrt{q} in mathbb{R}$ and $mathbb{Q}(sqrt{p}),mathbb{Q}( sqrt{q}),mathbb{Q}(sqrt{p}, sqrt{q}) subset mathbb{R}$.



Show that $X^2-q in mathbb{Q}(sqrt{p})[X]$ is irreducible, $[mathbb{Q}(sqrt{p}, sqrt{q}): mathbb{Q}]=4$ and that $1, sqrt{p}, sqrt{q}, sqrt{pq}$ is a basis for $mathbb{Q}(sqrt{p}, sqrt{q})$.



I keep finding posts about Galois groups but we didn't introduce that concept yet.
Thanks in advance for any help.






abstract-algebra







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




I don't know how to prove the following:



Let $p neq q$ be prime numbers, then $sqrt{p}, sqrt{q} in mathbb{R}$ and $mathbb{Q}(sqrt{p}),mathbb{Q}( sqrt{q}),mathbb{Q}(sqrt{p}, sqrt{q}) subset mathbb{R}$.



Show that $X^2-q in mathbb{Q}(sqrt{p})[X]$ is irreducible, $[mathbb{Q}(sqrt{p}, sqrt{q}): mathbb{Q}]=4$ and that $1, sqrt{p}, sqrt{q}, sqrt{pq}$ is a basis for $mathbb{Q}(sqrt{p}, sqrt{q})$.



I keep finding posts about Galois groups but we didn't introduce that concept yet.
Thanks in advance for any help.






abstract-algebra




abstract-algebra






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Dec 13 '18 at 22:38







Anzu

















asked Dec 13 '18 at 22:17









AnzuAnzu

246




246












  • $begingroup$
    Should it say $mathbb{Q} (sqrt{p}) [X]$ in the title?
    $endgroup$
    – Rellek
    Dec 13 '18 at 22:35










  • $begingroup$
    Yes, you're right. I'll fix it, thank you.
    $endgroup$
    – Anzu
    Dec 13 '18 at 22:38










  • $begingroup$
    I assume that the paragraph starting "Let" is background, not something you want help proving, but that could be clearer. Then there are three subquestions: irreducibility, extension degree, and basis. Do you have any idea for how to tackle any of the three?
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Taylor
    Dec 13 '18 at 22:44










  • $begingroup$
    Yes, exactly. The first paragraph is given. It could have been clearer, my bad. Reliek's solution is comprehensible, it answers my questions.
    $endgroup$
    – Anzu
    Dec 13 '18 at 22:57


















  • $begingroup$
    Should it say $mathbb{Q} (sqrt{p}) [X]$ in the title?
    $endgroup$
    – Rellek
    Dec 13 '18 at 22:35










  • $begingroup$
    Yes, you're right. I'll fix it, thank you.
    $endgroup$
    – Anzu
    Dec 13 '18 at 22:38










  • $begingroup$
    I assume that the paragraph starting "Let" is background, not something you want help proving, but that could be clearer. Then there are three subquestions: irreducibility, extension degree, and basis. Do you have any idea for how to tackle any of the three?
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Taylor
    Dec 13 '18 at 22:44










  • $begingroup$
    Yes, exactly. The first paragraph is given. It could have been clearer, my bad. Reliek's solution is comprehensible, it answers my questions.
    $endgroup$
    – Anzu
    Dec 13 '18 at 22:57
















$begingroup$
Should it say $mathbb{Q} (sqrt{p}) [X]$ in the title?
$endgroup$
– Rellek
Dec 13 '18 at 22:35




$begingroup$
Should it say $mathbb{Q} (sqrt{p}) [X]$ in the title?
$endgroup$
– Rellek
Dec 13 '18 at 22:35












$begingroup$
Yes, you're right. I'll fix it, thank you.
$endgroup$
– Anzu
Dec 13 '18 at 22:38




$begingroup$
Yes, you're right. I'll fix it, thank you.
$endgroup$
– Anzu
Dec 13 '18 at 22:38












$begingroup$
I assume that the paragraph starting "Let" is background, not something you want help proving, but that could be clearer. Then there are three subquestions: irreducibility, extension degree, and basis. Do you have any idea for how to tackle any of the three?
$endgroup$
– Peter Taylor
Dec 13 '18 at 22:44




$begingroup$
I assume that the paragraph starting "Let" is background, not something you want help proving, but that could be clearer. Then there are three subquestions: irreducibility, extension degree, and basis. Do you have any idea for how to tackle any of the three?
$endgroup$
– Peter Taylor
Dec 13 '18 at 22:44












$begingroup$
Yes, exactly. The first paragraph is given. It could have been clearer, my bad. Reliek's solution is comprehensible, it answers my questions.
$endgroup$
– Anzu
Dec 13 '18 at 22:57




$begingroup$
Yes, exactly. The first paragraph is given. It could have been clearer, my bad. Reliek's solution is comprehensible, it answers my questions.
$endgroup$
– Anzu
Dec 13 '18 at 22:57










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















2












$begingroup$

Notice that $X^2 - q$, $X^2 - p$ are irreducible over $mathbb{Q}$ because they have no roots, since any root would imply that $sqrt{p}$ and $sqrt{q}$ are rational numbers. Using the same proof as for the irrationality of $sqrt{2}$, we know this isn't true.



We then just need to show that $X^2 - q$ remains irreducible over $mathbb{Q} (sqrt{p})$. Again, it suffices to show there are no roots. A general element of $mathbb{Q} (sqrt{p})$ looks like $a + b sqrt{p}$ for $a, b in mathbb{Q}$; plugging this in:
$$(a+ b sqrt{p})^2 - q = 0 implies a^2 + b^2 p - q + 2 ab sqrt{p} = 0$$
which tells us $ab = 0$ and $a^2 + b^2 p = q$. This means $a=0$ or $b=0$. In the first case, we find that $p$ divides $q$, a contradiction. In the second case, we find that $a^2 = p$ for some rational number, again, impossible. This means that $[mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p} , sqrt{q} ) : mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p} ) ] =2$. Using the tower law,
$$[mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p} , sqrt{q} ) : mathbb{Q} ] = [mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p} , sqrt{q} ) : mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p} ) ] cdot [ mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p}) : mathbb{Q} ] = 4$$
Then to show that the set mentioned in the original question is a basis, it suffices to show $mathbb{Q}$-linear independence. I leave that to you.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    I like this answer for its generality. There are shorter proofs, either very special, or depending on fancy number theory. But this does the trick admirably.
    $endgroup$
    – Lubin
    Dec 13 '18 at 22:50












  • $begingroup$
    Thanks, this helps a lot. I should be able to show the linear independence.
    $endgroup$
    – Anzu
    Dec 13 '18 at 23:01












Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3038642%2fx2-q-in-mathbbq-sqrtpx-is-irreducible-and-mathbbq-sqrtp-s%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









2












$begingroup$

Notice that $X^2 - q$, $X^2 - p$ are irreducible over $mathbb{Q}$ because they have no roots, since any root would imply that $sqrt{p}$ and $sqrt{q}$ are rational numbers. Using the same proof as for the irrationality of $sqrt{2}$, we know this isn't true.



We then just need to show that $X^2 - q$ remains irreducible over $mathbb{Q} (sqrt{p})$. Again, it suffices to show there are no roots. A general element of $mathbb{Q} (sqrt{p})$ looks like $a + b sqrt{p}$ for $a, b in mathbb{Q}$; plugging this in:
$$(a+ b sqrt{p})^2 - q = 0 implies a^2 + b^2 p - q + 2 ab sqrt{p} = 0$$
which tells us $ab = 0$ and $a^2 + b^2 p = q$. This means $a=0$ or $b=0$. In the first case, we find that $p$ divides $q$, a contradiction. In the second case, we find that $a^2 = p$ for some rational number, again, impossible. This means that $[mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p} , sqrt{q} ) : mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p} ) ] =2$. Using the tower law,
$$[mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p} , sqrt{q} ) : mathbb{Q} ] = [mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p} , sqrt{q} ) : mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p} ) ] cdot [ mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p}) : mathbb{Q} ] = 4$$
Then to show that the set mentioned in the original question is a basis, it suffices to show $mathbb{Q}$-linear independence. I leave that to you.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    I like this answer for its generality. There are shorter proofs, either very special, or depending on fancy number theory. But this does the trick admirably.
    $endgroup$
    – Lubin
    Dec 13 '18 at 22:50












  • $begingroup$
    Thanks, this helps a lot. I should be able to show the linear independence.
    $endgroup$
    – Anzu
    Dec 13 '18 at 23:01
















2












$begingroup$

Notice that $X^2 - q$, $X^2 - p$ are irreducible over $mathbb{Q}$ because they have no roots, since any root would imply that $sqrt{p}$ and $sqrt{q}$ are rational numbers. Using the same proof as for the irrationality of $sqrt{2}$, we know this isn't true.



We then just need to show that $X^2 - q$ remains irreducible over $mathbb{Q} (sqrt{p})$. Again, it suffices to show there are no roots. A general element of $mathbb{Q} (sqrt{p})$ looks like $a + b sqrt{p}$ for $a, b in mathbb{Q}$; plugging this in:
$$(a+ b sqrt{p})^2 - q = 0 implies a^2 + b^2 p - q + 2 ab sqrt{p} = 0$$
which tells us $ab = 0$ and $a^2 + b^2 p = q$. This means $a=0$ or $b=0$. In the first case, we find that $p$ divides $q$, a contradiction. In the second case, we find that $a^2 = p$ for some rational number, again, impossible. This means that $[mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p} , sqrt{q} ) : mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p} ) ] =2$. Using the tower law,
$$[mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p} , sqrt{q} ) : mathbb{Q} ] = [mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p} , sqrt{q} ) : mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p} ) ] cdot [ mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p}) : mathbb{Q} ] = 4$$
Then to show that the set mentioned in the original question is a basis, it suffices to show $mathbb{Q}$-linear independence. I leave that to you.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    I like this answer for its generality. There are shorter proofs, either very special, or depending on fancy number theory. But this does the trick admirably.
    $endgroup$
    – Lubin
    Dec 13 '18 at 22:50












  • $begingroup$
    Thanks, this helps a lot. I should be able to show the linear independence.
    $endgroup$
    – Anzu
    Dec 13 '18 at 23:01














2












2








2





$begingroup$

Notice that $X^2 - q$, $X^2 - p$ are irreducible over $mathbb{Q}$ because they have no roots, since any root would imply that $sqrt{p}$ and $sqrt{q}$ are rational numbers. Using the same proof as for the irrationality of $sqrt{2}$, we know this isn't true.



We then just need to show that $X^2 - q$ remains irreducible over $mathbb{Q} (sqrt{p})$. Again, it suffices to show there are no roots. A general element of $mathbb{Q} (sqrt{p})$ looks like $a + b sqrt{p}$ for $a, b in mathbb{Q}$; plugging this in:
$$(a+ b sqrt{p})^2 - q = 0 implies a^2 + b^2 p - q + 2 ab sqrt{p} = 0$$
which tells us $ab = 0$ and $a^2 + b^2 p = q$. This means $a=0$ or $b=0$. In the first case, we find that $p$ divides $q$, a contradiction. In the second case, we find that $a^2 = p$ for some rational number, again, impossible. This means that $[mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p} , sqrt{q} ) : mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p} ) ] =2$. Using the tower law,
$$[mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p} , sqrt{q} ) : mathbb{Q} ] = [mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p} , sqrt{q} ) : mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p} ) ] cdot [ mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p}) : mathbb{Q} ] = 4$$
Then to show that the set mentioned in the original question is a basis, it suffices to show $mathbb{Q}$-linear independence. I leave that to you.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$



Notice that $X^2 - q$, $X^2 - p$ are irreducible over $mathbb{Q}$ because they have no roots, since any root would imply that $sqrt{p}$ and $sqrt{q}$ are rational numbers. Using the same proof as for the irrationality of $sqrt{2}$, we know this isn't true.



We then just need to show that $X^2 - q$ remains irreducible over $mathbb{Q} (sqrt{p})$. Again, it suffices to show there are no roots. A general element of $mathbb{Q} (sqrt{p})$ looks like $a + b sqrt{p}$ for $a, b in mathbb{Q}$; plugging this in:
$$(a+ b sqrt{p})^2 - q = 0 implies a^2 + b^2 p - q + 2 ab sqrt{p} = 0$$
which tells us $ab = 0$ and $a^2 + b^2 p = q$. This means $a=0$ or $b=0$. In the first case, we find that $p$ divides $q$, a contradiction. In the second case, we find that $a^2 = p$ for some rational number, again, impossible. This means that $[mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p} , sqrt{q} ) : mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p} ) ] =2$. Using the tower law,
$$[mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p} , sqrt{q} ) : mathbb{Q} ] = [mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p} , sqrt{q} ) : mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p} ) ] cdot [ mathbb{Q} ( sqrt{p}) : mathbb{Q} ] = 4$$
Then to show that the set mentioned in the original question is a basis, it suffices to show $mathbb{Q}$-linear independence. I leave that to you.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Dec 13 '18 at 22:47









RellekRellek

1,505517




1,505517












  • $begingroup$
    I like this answer for its generality. There are shorter proofs, either very special, or depending on fancy number theory. But this does the trick admirably.
    $endgroup$
    – Lubin
    Dec 13 '18 at 22:50












  • $begingroup$
    Thanks, this helps a lot. I should be able to show the linear independence.
    $endgroup$
    – Anzu
    Dec 13 '18 at 23:01


















  • $begingroup$
    I like this answer for its generality. There are shorter proofs, either very special, or depending on fancy number theory. But this does the trick admirably.
    $endgroup$
    – Lubin
    Dec 13 '18 at 22:50












  • $begingroup$
    Thanks, this helps a lot. I should be able to show the linear independence.
    $endgroup$
    – Anzu
    Dec 13 '18 at 23:01
















$begingroup$
I like this answer for its generality. There are shorter proofs, either very special, or depending on fancy number theory. But this does the trick admirably.
$endgroup$
– Lubin
Dec 13 '18 at 22:50






$begingroup$
I like this answer for its generality. There are shorter proofs, either very special, or depending on fancy number theory. But this does the trick admirably.
$endgroup$
– Lubin
Dec 13 '18 at 22:50














$begingroup$
Thanks, this helps a lot. I should be able to show the linear independence.
$endgroup$
– Anzu
Dec 13 '18 at 23:01




$begingroup$
Thanks, this helps a lot. I should be able to show the linear independence.
$endgroup$
– Anzu
Dec 13 '18 at 23:01


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3038642%2fx2-q-in-mathbbq-sqrtpx-is-irreducible-and-mathbbq-sqrtp-s%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







-

Popular posts from this blog

How to change which sound is reproduced for terminal bell?

Image
3 Recently upgrade to 18.10 from 18.04, and using the terminal is becoming annoying: the new alert sound is a drip ( /usr/share/sounds/gnome/default/alerts/drip.ogg ), and the previous one is still located at ( /usr/share/sounds/ubuntu/stereo/bell.ogg ). My issue is that at the gnome-terminal, when autocompleting or pressing left BOTH sounds are reproduced, at the same time. I want to just have ubuntu/stereo/bell.ogg active, not both . At the moment I have been only able to reduce the volume of the alerts (but still both are played), or turn the alerts down (but I dislike both "solutions"). gnome-terminal 18.10 teminal-bell share | improve this question
Read more

Can I use Tabulator js library in my java Spring + Thymeleaf project?

Image
0 I want to add Tabulator js to my java project. I added tabulator.min.js, tabulator.min.css to resources folder. After that added to my html page these dependencies as recommending in readme.md. <link rel="stylesheet" th:href="@{/css/tabulator.min.css}"> <script type="text/javascript" th:src="@{/js/tabulator.min.js}"></script> Now my tables view all elements, that I have in the html page, but not correct. In the documentation of Tabulator is example how to create header and table, var table = new Tabulator("#example-table", { columns:[ {title:"Name", field:"name", sorter:"string", width:200, editor:true}, {title:"Age", field:"age", sorter:"
Read more

Title Spacing in Bjornstrup Chapter, Removing Chapter Number From Contents

Image
up vote 5 down vote favorite 2 I would like to make it so that the vertical space below the title of each chapter is the same when using the Bjornstrup package (i.e. so that the descenders do not affect the spacing - as shown by the red arrow in the picture below). I think I'm fairly happy with the spacing around "A chapter", so I'd really like titles without descenders (e.g. "Contents") to have the same vertical spacing as "A chapter" below the title. I would also like to remove the large "0" in the contents title. Any help appreciated, as always. documentclass[11pt,a4paper]{book} % Packages[![enter image description here][1]][1] usepackage[left=3.5cm, right=3.5cm, top=4.3cm, bottom=4.25cm]{geometry} usepackage[utf8]{inputenc} usepackage{libertine} usepackage[libertine]{newtx
Read more