2
$\begingroup$

I posed this question on Math.Stackexchange (see here) but until now there was no response. This made me decide to give it a try here.


Let $k\subseteq F$ denote an algebraic field extension and let $\alpha\in F$ having $f\in k[x]$ as its minimal polynomial. Further let $G=\mathsf{Aut}_k(F)$.

My question:

If $\beta\in F$ is a root of $f$ then does there exists some $\sigma\in G$ with $\sigma(\alpha)=\beta$?

In other words: is every root of $f$ in $F$ also an element of orbit $G\alpha$?

I know that the answer is "yes" if the extension is normal but am puzzling whether this condition can be dropped.

Thank you in advance for taking notice of this question, and sorry if it is a duplicate (or for some other reason not suitable for MathOverflow).


Edit: at first hand I forgot to state that $\beta$ is assumed to be an element of $F$. That is repaired now by. Sorry for confusion.

$\endgroup$
15
  • $\begingroup$ Literally the title doesn't fit the question (that an assumption can't be erased from a result doesn't mean that the the result implies the assumption). $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Commented Nov 11, 2021 at 16:41
  • $\begingroup$ @YCor I agree, but is it really necessary to repair that? My main question is whether by action of $G=\mathsf{Aut}_k(F)$ on $F$ the orbits coincide with sets of roots of minimal polynomials (as is the case by normal extensions) or can also be proper subsets of them. $\endgroup$
    – drhab
    Commented Nov 11, 2021 at 17:05
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes you could, but especially you should modify the question saying explicitly $\beta\in F$ since allowing $\beta$ to live in some larger extension gives rise to some absurd interpretation of the question. $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Commented Nov 11, 2021 at 17:11
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @YCor The question in the title is the same as the question in the body (and the question answered by Christian Remling): "is normality necessary or can it be weakened". Why do you think it is misleading? $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 11, 2021 at 17:49
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @EmilJeřábek no, I think that the question is the one answered by Wojowu and by David Loeffler. Namely, you start from the theorem "On a normal finite extension $k\subset F$, the automorphism group $\mathrm{Aut}_k(F)$ acts transitively on the set of roots of any irreducible polynomial $P$ over $k$" (well, say action on $\emptyset$ is transitive). I think OP wants to ask whether this is still true without "normal", and this is awkwardly stated in the title as "is normal a necessary condition". The question is thus whether there is a non-normal extension for which this result fails. $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Commented Nov 11, 2021 at 17:53

2 Answers 2

7
$\begingroup$

Here is a different interpretation of the question, which is hopefully closer to OP's intent:

Let $F/k$ be an algebraic field extension, and let $\alpha\in F$. Does $Aut_k(F)$ act transitively on the conjugates of $\alpha$ which are contained in $F$?

The answer to this question is no in general. For instance, consider $k=\mathbb Q$, $F=\mathbb Q(\sqrt[4]{2})$, and $\alpha=\sqrt{2}$. Then $F$ contains the conjugate $-\sqrt{2}$ of $\alpha$, but there is no automorphism of $F$ carrying $\sqrt{2}$ to $-\sqrt{2}$, because the former is a square in $F$ and the latter is not.


There is, however, one important case where the answer is positive, specifically when $F=k(\alpha)$. Indeed, in this case, for any conjugate $\beta$ of $\alpha$ contained in $F$, we must have $k(\beta)=F$ as well, since the two have the same degree over $k$ (equal to the degree of the minimal polynomial $\alpha$ and $\beta$). From standard field theory you get an isomorphism from $k(\alpha)$ to $k(\beta)$ fixing $k$ and taking $\alpha$ to $\beta$, which is then an automorphism of $F$.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you. I have edited my question and ask you to have a second look. Point is that clearly orbit $G\alpha$ is a subset of $\{\text{roots of }f\text{ in }F\}$. My question is: can this subset be a proper subset? Maybe you already gave an appropriate answer already but I need some time to think it over. Sorry for caused confusion. $\endgroup$
    – drhab
    Commented Nov 11, 2021 at 18:24
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ My interpretation of your question does address this problem. The answer is that: yes, it can be a proper subset ($\sqrt{2}\in\mathbb Q (\sqrt[4]{2})/\mathbb Q$ is an example). I also give a special case in which the answer is no. $\endgroup$
    – Wojowu
    Commented Nov 11, 2021 at 18:41
2
$\begingroup$

Yes, this can hold for non-normal extensions, for example $F=\mathbb Q(2^{1/3})$. For any zeros $\alpha,\beta\in F$ of an irreducible $f\in\mathbb Q[x]$, we can always map $\alpha\mapsto\beta$ by a $\mathbb Q$-automorphism $\sigma: \mathbb Q(\alpha)\to \mathbb Q(\beta)$, and there are no intermediate fields here since $[F:\mathbb Q]=3$. (So in the example, it follows that $\beta=\alpha$.)


In view of the persistent criticism by YCor below, it's perhaps worth stating very explicitly the question I'm answering here (admittedly, quite trivially) and that I think the OP asked:

Suppose that $F/k$ is an algebraic field extension with the following property: if $\alpha,\beta\in F$ are zeros of an irreducible $f\in k[x]$, then there is a $k$-automorphism of $F$ mapping $\alpha\mapsto\beta$. Does it follow that $F/k$ is normal?

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ I don't think it answers the question, since $\beta$ is assumed to be in $F$ (otherwise the question would be obviously absurd, since $\sigma$ is assumed to be an automorphism of $F$). $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Commented Nov 11, 2021 at 17:01
  • $\begingroup$ And you can see in the original MathSE discussion that such cubic extensions were already discussed. $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Commented Nov 11, 2021 at 17:03
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @YCor: Well, I answered the question as asked. Admittedly, the answer is not very thrilling or exciting. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 11, 2021 at 17:04
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for your clarification. Actually in my first comment to the question (posted 20 minutes before you posted an answer), I noticed that the title doesn't fit the question, and indeed I acknowledge you literally answer the question in the title. $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Commented Nov 11, 2021 at 17:39
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you. I have edited my question and ask you to have a second look. Point is that clearly orbit $G\alpha$ is a subset of $\{\text{roots of }f\text{ in }F\}$. My question is: can this subset be a proper subset? Maybe you already gave an appropriate answer already but I need some time to think it over. Sorry for caused confusion. $\endgroup$
    – drhab
    Commented Nov 11, 2021 at 18:25

You must log in to answer this question.

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