6
$\begingroup$

When is $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{p+\sqrt{p}})$ a Galois extension of $\mathbb{Q}$?

I was motivated by the question that $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{5+\sqrt{5}})$ is a Galois extension of $\mathbb{Q}$. Here is a rough sketch of the proof.

First, note that the polynomial $$f(x)=(x-\sqrt{5+\sqrt{5}}) (x+\sqrt{5+\sqrt{5}})(x-\sqrt{5-\sqrt{5}})(x+\sqrt{5-\sqrt{5}})$$ is irreducible by the Eisenstein irreducibility criterion. So we claim that $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{5+\sqrt{5}})$ is the splitting field of the separable polynomial $f(x)$. It suffices to show that $\sqrt{5-\sqrt{5}}\in\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{5+\sqrt{5}})$. To do this, we first note that $5+\sqrt{5}$ and hence $\sqrt{5}$ is in $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{5+\sqrt{5}})$.

Then, by noticing that $$\sqrt{5-\sqrt{5}}=\frac{\color{red}{\sqrt{5-1}}\sqrt{5}}{\sqrt{5+\sqrt{5}}}= \frac{\color{red}2\sqrt{5}}{\sqrt{5+\sqrt{5}}},\tag{1}$$

we see that $\sqrt{5-\sqrt{5}}$ is in $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{5+\sqrt{5}})$ as desired.

By the above argument, we see that $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{p+\sqrt{p}})$ is a Galois extension of $\mathbb{Q}$ when $p-1$ is a square number. (The importance of $p-1$ being a square number can be seen from equation (1)-See the part highlighted in red)

I am wondering if this is both a necessary and sufficient criterion for $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{p+\sqrt{p}})$ to be a Galois extension of $\mathbb{Q}$. In other words, $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{p+\sqrt{p}})$ is a Galois extension of $\mathbb{Q}$ if and only if $p$ is prime and $p-1$ is a square number.

Some things that I have noticed regarding this problem:

  1. $p=3$ doesn’t satisfy the suggested criterion and isn’t a Galois extension. See (https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/4052247/showing-that-mathbbq-sqrt3-sqrt3-is-not-galois)

  2. For general a $p$, $f(x)=x^4-2px^2+(p^2-p)$.

  3. I am not sure if we need $p$ to be prime. The only place where we used $p$ is prime is when we used the Eisenstein irreducibility criterion. But do we really need $f(x)$ to be irreducible?

  4. This is where I am probably getting a bit ahead of myself. But when we say that $p-1$ is a square number, most of us naturally assume that $p$ is in $\mathbb{Z}^+$ and $p-1$ is square in $\mathbb{Z}^+$. But can we further generalise the result by allowing $p$ to be in $\mathbb{Q}$ and $p-1$ be square in $\mathbb{Q}$?

$\endgroup$
3
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ $p$ certainly does not need to be prime: e.g., the extension is Galois whenever $p$ is a square. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 11, 2022 at 6:07
  • $\begingroup$ @EmilJeřábek Oh yes! Can’t believe that I missed something so obvious. Was thinking of the case when $p=a^2b$, where $b$ is non-square. For example, $p=2^2\times 3$ $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 11, 2022 at 6:11
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Moreover, for the Eisenstein irreducibility criterion you only need $p$ to not be a powerful number. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 11, 2022 at 6:34

1 Answer 1

11
$\begingroup$

Note that $f$ cannot have an irreducible factor of degree $3$ since it is even, so if $f$ is reducible, it means that the minimal polynomial of $\sqrt{p+\sqrt{p}}$ has degree at most $2$, so your extension is automatically Galois in this case.

Hence we may assume without loss of generality that $f$ is irreducible.

Your question then may be rephrased as follows: when is the Galois group of $f=X^4-2pX^2+p^2-p$ is the Klein group or the cyclic group of order $4$ ?

The answer (and much more!) is given in Corollary 4.5. of this paper by Keith Conrad

Applied to your specific polynomial, the answer is : exactly when $p^2-p$ is a square (Klein group case) or when $p-1$ is a square (cyclic case).

Another link with a direct proof may be found here

$\endgroup$
3
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ But $p^2-p$ cannot be square, as it is divisible by $p$ but not $p^2$. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 11, 2022 at 9:45
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Take $p = 4/3$... (the criterion is valid for rational $p$ such that the polynomial is irreducible). $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 11, 2022 at 10:24
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ With $p = 4/3$, the polynomial is reducible, but $p = 9/5$ gives a Klein group example. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 11, 2022 at 10:49

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.