0
$\begingroup$

Suppose $K$ is an algebraic number field. We want to determine whether, for all even $n$, there always exists a cyclic Galois extension $L$ of degree $n$ over $K$ such that the intermediate field $K_2$ does not contain any primitive $2^i$-th root of unity for $i \geq 3$ where $ K _2 $ is the intermediate field.

If $ K = \mathbb{Q} $ then it is true. Since for all $ n $ there exist infinitely many primes $ p $ such that $ n $ divides $ n -1 $. As $ p$-th cyclotomic polynomial is irreducible over $ \mathbb{Q} $ then using Galois corresponding theorem we get a cyclic galois extension $ L $ of degree $ n $. Now since $ \phi(2^{i}) > 2 $ where $ i \geq 3 $ so any primitive $ 2^i $-th root of unity can not lie in $ K_2 $.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ In your 2nd paragraph, you must mean $n$ divides $p-1$ (not $n$). $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 11, 2023 at 6:22

1 Answer 1

2
$\begingroup$

It's not quite clear from the post what $K_2$ is, but I'll just pretend $K_2=L$, which gives the strongest result.

Those infinitely many extensions constructed over $\mathbb{Q}$ are all linearly disjoint (e.g. since in each one, the respective prime $p$ is the only ramified prime), and thus there are in particular infinitely many $L/\mathbb{Q}$ among them which are linearly disjoint to $K(\zeta_8)$. Then firstly $LK/K$ is still cyclic of degree $n$, and also $LK$ has no $2^i$-th roots of unity which weren't already in $K$. So yes, it's possible unless in the trivially impossible case where $K$ itself contains such roots of unity.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ Since L/K is cyclic galois extension of degree n and n is even so there exist a subgroup of the galoi group of index 2. So there exist an intermediate field of degree 2 of Q. Here K_2 is that field. $\endgroup$
    – Sky
    Commented Jun 14, 2023 at 19:41
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, I suspected that. But surely, that's implied by showing it for all of $L$ instead. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 15, 2023 at 0:04
  • $\begingroup$ Can you provide a reference that guarantees the linearly disjointness of L and Q(\zeta_8), although I knew that there are infinitely many prime numbers p for which the intersection of L and Q(\zeta_8) is Q $\endgroup$
    – Sky
    Commented Jun 15, 2023 at 19:05

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .