# Is Q_r algebraically isomorphic to Q_s while r and s denote different primes? [closed]

It is obvious that Q_r is topologically isomorphic to Q_s while r and s denote different primes.But I really don't know whether it is true in the aspect of algebra.As I failed to prove it,I think that it is false,but I can't give a counterexample. Last I'm quite sorry that I'm new to MathJax and I don't know how to use it properly.Thanks for reading and I would appreciate it if you could solve my problem.

## closed as too localized by user9198, Felipe Voloch, Chandan Singh Dalawat, GH from MO, Igor RivinDec 23 '11 at 15:00

This question is unlikely to help any future visitors; it is only relevant to a small geographic area, a specific moment in time, or an extraordinarily narrow situation that is not generally applicable to the worldwide audience of the internet. For help making this question more broadly applicable, visit the help center. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

• No. For example, $\mathbb{Q}_3$ is not isomorphic to $\mathbb{Q}_5$, for the following reason: any field isomorphism would have to map $-1$ to $-1$; but $\mathbb{Q}_5$ contains a square root of $-1$, whereas $\mathbb{Q}_3$ does not. – Martin Bright Dec 23 '11 at 7:43
• Never: a Galois group $G=\mathrm{Gal} (F/\mathbb{Q}_b)$ is solvable, and in fact $[[G,G],[G,G]]$ is a $p$-group (contained in the wild inertia), and for any $p$ one can choose $F$ so that it is a non-trivial $p$-group. – Homology Dec 23 '11 at 7:48
• One can more simply compare the groups of roots of unity contained in the two fields. – Chandan Singh Dalawat Dec 23 '11 at 8:43
• ... except for ${\mathbf Q}_2$ and ${\mathbf Q}_3$, which have the same number of roots of unity. But $-2$ is a square in ${\mathbf Q}_3$ but not in ${\mathbf Q}_2$. – KConrad Dec 23 '11 at 8:48
• This has also been asked on MSE, where it really belongs. I have voted to close. – Alex B. Dec 23 '11 at 9:06

For a prime $p \neq 2$, the multiplicative group $\mathbb{Q}_p^\times$ is isomorphic to $\mathbb Z \times \mathbb Z_p \times \mathbb Z/(p-1)$, while $\mathbb Q_2^\times$ is isomorphic to $\mathbb Z \times \mathbb Z_2 \times \mathbb Z/2$, cf. Serre, A course in arithmetic, Theorem II.3.2 (p. 17). Since a field isomorphism $\varphi\colon \mathbb Q_p \to \mathbb Q_r$ will preserve the torsion subgroup of the multiplicative subgroup, this shows that $\mathbb Q_p \not\cong \mathbb Q_r$ whenever $\{p,r\} \neq \{2,3\}$. The remaining case is taken care of by the fact that $\mathbb{Q}_p^\times$ / $\mathbb {Q}_p ^{\times 2}$ $\cong \mathbb Z/2 \times \mathbb Z/2$ whenever $p \neq 2$, while $\mathbb Q_2^\times$ / $\mathbb Q_2^{\times 2} \cong \mathbb Z/2 \times \mathbb Z/2 \times \mathbb Z/2$, cf. loc. cit., p.18.