DOCSLIB.ORG

Letters to the Editor

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Letters to the Editor Letters to the Editor More on Galois Riemann’s relevance, see M. Fried, “Al- 2. About Galois’s death, I argue that Davide Bondoni (“Galois’s first mem- ternating groups and moduli space it was a suicide in disguise caused by oir”, Notices, May 2013) suggests to- lifting invariants”, arXiv #0611591v4, Galois’s inability to integrate himself day’s Galois theory is collective work, Israel J. Math. 179 (2010), 57–125, (DOI into a social group (be it academic, not purely Galois’s creation. He sug- 10.1007/s11856-010-0073-2), and my political, or other). Galois’s suicide, gests that we would best go indirectly website’s attached html file on modular masked as a duel, was the only way at the “master’s work”. towers and modular representations. he could affirm control of his life. Ap- Bondoni’s article may rightly react We gain much by looking back at the parent homicides were explained as to the recent C. Curtis review (Notices, optimism of Galois, Abel, and others, to suicides recently by Goeschel [Goe09] pursue results before they had a clue as December 2012) of P. Neumann’s book and by Emil Durkheim in his 1897 mas- to the outcome. Yes, newcomers would The Mathematical Writings of Evariste terwork [Dur13]. need help from those who have contin- Galois. Curtis restated the myth of ued such topics. References Galois’s death consequent on a duel. A variant on Rigatelli is in my Bul- Mathematicians have long accepted [Bon11] Davide Bondoni, Structural fea- letin London Math. Soc. 34 (2002), that was over a “tart” the night after he tures in Ernst Schröder’s work—Part I, 109–112, review of Matzat and Malle’s “created his theory of groups.” Bondoni Logic and Logical Philosophy 20 (2011), Inverse Galois Theory: http://www. refers only to Galois’s Theory erupting no. 4, 327–359. math.uci.edu/~mfried/booklist- [Bon12] _______, Structural features in overnight. vol/Matzat-MalleInvGal.pdf. Ernst Schröder’s work—Part II, Logic I address Galois’s supposed lack of and Logical philosophy 21 (2012), clarity. —Mike Fried, Emeritus no. 3, 271–315. 1. His work wasn’t just about groups University of California, Irvine [Dur13] Émile Durkheim, Le suicide, (as we might guess from Curtis’s re- [email protected] Presses Universitaires de France, Paris, view), or even groups delineating fields. 2013, reprint of the original 1897 2. Where Galois aimed remains still (Received May 6, 2013) edition. unreached. [Goe09] Christian Goeschel, Suicide L. T. Rigatelli, Evariste Galois: 1811– Reply to Mike Fried in Nazi Germany, Oxford University 1832, Italian-to-English translation by Press, Oxford, 2009. Let me ponder two questions present John Denton, Vita Math. 11 (Birkhäuser, [Sch74] Ernst Schröder, Über die for- Basel, 1996) remains strangely un- in Mike Fried’s letter. malen Elemente der Absoluten Algebra, acknowledged. Several use her cover 1. As a matter of fact, all math- E. Schweizerbart’sche Buchdruckerei picture of Galois while repeating myths ematicians do understand mathe- (E. Koch), Stuttgart, 1874. she debunks. Rigatelli documents that matical objects by relying on their [Sch12] _______, On the Formal Elements the girl in question was hardly a tart. own personal experience. We of the Absolute Algebra, LED Edizioni, Also, Galois was more likely a suicide must thank people like Klein for a Milan, 2012, English translation of structural reading of the concept than a duel victim. [Sch74] edited by Davide Bondoni. of group. While for Galois the con- Galois used Abel’s introduction of cept of group was only instrumen- modular curves we now call X (p). —Davide Bondoni 0 tal in proving the nonresolution of Thereby, Abel explained the smooth Independent scholar, Italy a fifth degree equation by radicals, variation of his famous elliptic curve [email protected] other mathematicians regarded function theorem. Galois’s unsolvability the concept of group from a meta- theorem showed these equations—ex- (Received June 28, 2013) mathematical perspective, i.e., as a cluding finitely many—were unsolvable concept of a theory useful for studying in j invariant radicals. Mathematics and Historical structured sets. Yet in 1874 the Ger- Galois deftly connected finite groups Chronology man mathematician Ernst Schröder in (even profinite by introducing the The Notices published in August 2013 a short pamphlet [Sch74] accomplished groups SL (pk)) and systems of analytic two letters related to my invited ar- 2 an analysis of such mathematical struc- spaces—before he was twenty-one and ticle “Mathematical methods in the tures, attaining the definitions of loops, without the best education to boot. study of historical chronology”, [No- semi-groups, and (commutative) groups, Spaces, especially profinite sys- tices, April 2013], which was duly starting from his personal structural tems, have components, cusps, dif- reviewed by seven anonymous referees. philosophy of mathematics.1 Accord- ferentials. These force you beyond This piece is based on my book The ing to such a point of view, an object in profinite thinking. (Contrary to what Lost Millennium—History’s Timetables itself does not exist; it exists only in a Curtis once insisted in my UCI of- Under Siege, an objective account of given context. Mathematics is not neu- fice.) Riemann, a certified genius, only the debate between historians and tral, but it is only context-dependent, as partially fulfilled over thirty years later revisionists of the established chronol- the various interpretations of Galois’s what Galois ended in 1832. ogy, the latter group known to include work testify. Even from Riemann—despite Gauss’ many cranks, such as Immanuel Ve- early help—much remains unfinished. I 1I had occasion to write on this topic ex- likovsky. Among other issues, I analyze still hear complaints about Riemann’s tensively (see [Bon11], [Bon12] and my there the controversial work of Anatoli clarity. For my meaning on finite introductory essay Algebra, what else? in Fomenko and his collaborators, which groups among profinite situations, and [Sch12, pp. ix–xli]). I divide into three categories: good SEPTEMBER 2013 NOTICES OF THE AMS 1015 Letters to the Editor (follows established mathematical re- also played important roles in making it sults and has not been refuted, so far), firmly accepted. And the establishment mediocre or weak (unconventional or of a rigorous mathematical foundation questionable applications of otherwise of circular DNA topology further sup- sound mathematics), and blunders ports the helix structure. (conclusions drawn using false prem- Pauling and Corey proposed a triple ises or reasoning). In my Notices article helix DNA structure in 1953, which I focus on some mathematical methods turned out to be wrong. Watson and used in chronology that have already Crick had considered an incorrect DNA helped historians with dating events or model before the double helix; in their may do so in the future. But in the eyes earlier incorrect model, the negatively of the letter writers, Fomenko steals charged phosphate groups of two the show. strands of DNA interact by binding Claude LeBrun openly trashes Fo- with the magnesium ion between two menko’s work without providing any phosphates, and four bases (adenine , Sept. 1976. evidence against my article, which he and thymine; guanine and cytosine) nevertheless dislikes, mostly for not have no interaction. having any mathematical content. Well, The double helix is intertwining and had he read what I wrote, he might have topologically constrained for circular learned that one of the issues I deal DNA. A big difficulty is the separation with is the motion of the moon, so it of strands during replication. There- embodies results in celestial mechanics fore the double helix was challenged (mainly differential equations) obtained even after Watson and Crick had been Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA by Newton, Lagrange, Laplace, Poisson, awarded the Nobel Prize in 1962, and [2] G. A. Rodley, R. S. Scobie, R. H. T. Jacobi, Poincaré, Hill, and others. My the side-by-side model of DNA was pro- article also refers to other branches of Bates and R. M. Lewitt, A possible posed (see accompanying figure) [2, 3]. conformation for double-stranded mathematics. The exclusion of the side-by-side model polynucleotides, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. The letter by Alex Emerenko and was recalled by Crick [4]: U.S.A. 73 (1976), 2959–2963. Victor Grinberg attempts, at least, to “At about this time Bill Pohl, a pure [3] W. F. Pohl and G. W. Roberts, Topo- argue against the publication of my mathematician, got into the act. He logical considerations in the theory article. But the way they do it reminds pointed out, quite correctly, that un- of replication of DNA, J. Math. Biol. 6 me of a joke about a man who was try- less something very special happened, (1978), 383–402. ing to find his keys around a lamppost, the most likely result of replicating a [4] F. Crick, What Mad Pursuit: A Per- though aware that he had lost them in piece of circular DNA would be two sonal View of Scientific Discovery, Basic the dark, a block away. Instead of dis- interlocked daughter circles rather Books, New York, USA, 1988, pp. 72–73. cussing the issues I present, they take than two separate ones. From this he [5] F. B. Fuller, The writhing number of a my statements out of context, apply space curve, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA deduced that the DNA chains could not them to all of Fomenko’s work, then 68 (1971), 815–819. be intertwined, as we had suggested, quote some of Fomenko’s blunders, and [6] J. H. White, Self-linking and the Gauss but had to lie side by side. finally let the reader decide whether integral in higher dimensions, Am.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Galois Groups of Cubics and Quartics (Not in Characteristic 2)
    GALOIS GROUPS OF CUBICS AND QUARTICS (NOT IN CHARACTERISTIC 2) KEITH CONRAD We will describe a procedure for figuring out the Galois groups of separable irreducible polynomials in degrees 3 and 4 over fields not of characteristic 2. This does not include explicit formulas for the roots, i.e., we are not going to derive the classical cubic and quartic formulas. 1. Review Let K be a field and f(X) be a separable polynomial in K[X]. The Galois group of f(X) over K permutes the roots of f(X) in a splitting field, and labeling the roots as r1; : : : ; rn provides an embedding of the Galois group into Sn. We recall without proof two theorems about this embedding. Theorem 1.1. Let f(X) 2 K[X] be a separable polynomial of degree n. (a) If f(X) is irreducible in K[X] then its Galois group over K has order divisible by n. (b) The polynomial f(X) is irreducible in K[X] if and only if its Galois group over K is a transitive subgroup of Sn. Definition 1.2. If f(X) 2 K[X] factors in a splitting field as f(X) = c(X − r1) ··· (X − rn); the discriminant of f(X) is defined to be Y 2 disc f = (rj − ri) : i<j In degree 3 and 4, explicit formulas for discriminants of some monic polynomials are (1.1) disc(X3 + aX + b) = −4a3 − 27b2; disc(X4 + aX + b) = −27a4 + 256b3; disc(X4 + aX2 + b) = 16b(a2 − 4b)2: Theorem 1.3.
    [Show full text]
  • Cyclotomic Extensions
    CYCLOTOMIC EXTENSIONS KEITH CONRAD 1. Introduction For a positive integer n, an nth root of unity in a field is a solution to zn = 1, or equivalently is a root of T n − 1. There are at most n different nth roots of unity in a field since T n − 1 has at most n roots in a field. A root of unity is an nth root of unity for some n. The only roots of unity in R are ±1, while in C there are n different nth roots of unity for each n, namely e2πik=n for 0 ≤ k ≤ n − 1 and they form a group of order n. In characteristic p there is no pth root of unity besides 1: if xp = 1 in characteristic p then 0 = xp − 1 = (x − 1)p, so x = 1. That is strange, but it is a key feature of characteristic p, e.g., it makes the pth power map x 7! xp on fields of characteristic p injective. For a field K, an extension of the form K(ζ), where ζ is a root of unity, is called a cyclotomic extension of K. The term cyclotomic means \circle-dividing," which comes from the fact that the nth roots of unity in C divide a circle into n arcs of equal length, as in Figure 1 when n = 7. The important algebraic fact we will explore is that cyclotomic extensions of every field have an abelian Galois group; we will look especially at cyclotomic extensions of Q and finite fields. There are not many general methods known for constructing abelian extensions (that is, Galois extensions with abelian Galois group); cyclotomic extensions are essentially the only construction that works over all fields.
    [Show full text]
  • A Brief History of Mathematics a Brief History of Mathematics
    A Brief History of Mathematics A Brief History of Mathematics What is mathematics? What do mathematicians do? A Brief History of Mathematics What is mathematics? What do mathematicians do? http://www.sfu.ca/~rpyke/presentations.html A Brief History of Mathematics • Egypt; 3000B.C. – Positional number system, base 10 – Addition, multiplication, division. Fractions. – Complicated formalism; limited algebra. – Only perfect squares (no irrational numbers). – Area of circle; (8D/9)² Æ ∏=3.1605. Volume of pyramid. A Brief History of Mathematics • Babylon; 1700‐300B.C. – Positional number system (base 60; sexagesimal) – Addition, multiplication, division. Fractions. – Solved systems of equations with many unknowns – No negative numbers. No geometry. – Squares, cubes, square roots, cube roots – Solve quadratic equations (but no quadratic formula) – Uses: Building, planning, selling, astronomy (later) A Brief History of Mathematics • Greece; 600B.C. – 600A.D. Papyrus created! – Pythagoras; mathematics as abstract concepts, properties of numbers, irrationality of √2, Pythagorean Theorem a²+b²=c², geometric areas – Zeno paradoxes; infinite sum of numbers is finite! – Constructions with ruler and compass; ‘Squaring the circle’, ‘Doubling the cube’, ‘Trisecting the angle’ – Plato; plane and solid geometry A Brief History of Mathematics • Greece; 600B.C. – 600A.D. Aristotle; mathematics and the physical world (astronomy, geography, mechanics), mathematical formalism (definitions, axioms, proofs via construction) – Euclid; Elements –13 books. Geometry,
    [Show full text]
  • EARLY HISTORY of GALOIS' THEORY of EQUATIONS. the First Part of This Paper Will Treat of Galois' Relations to Lagrange, the Seco
    332 HISTORY OF GALOIS' THEORY. [April, EARLY HISTORY OF GALOIS' THEORY OF EQUATIONS. BY PROFESSOR JAMES PIERPONT. ( Read before the American Mathematical Society at the Meeting of Feb­ ruary 26, 1897.) THE first part of this paper will treat of Galois' relations to Lagrange, the second part will sketch the manner in which Galois' theory of equations became public. The last subject being intimately connected with Galois' life will af­ ford me an opportunity to give some details of his tragic destiny which in more than one respect reminds one of the almost equally unhappy lot of Abel.* Indeed, both Galois and Abel from their earliest youth were strongly attracted toward algebraical theories ; both believed for a time that they had solved the celebrated equation of fifth degree which for more than two centuries had baffled the efforts of the first mathematicians of the age ; both, discovering their mistake, succeeded independently and unknown to each other in showing that a solution by radicals was impossible ; both, hoping to gain the recognition of the Paris Academy of Sciences, presented epoch making memoirs, one of which * Sources for Galois' Life are : 1° Revue Encyclopédique, Paris (1832), vol. 55. a Travaux Mathématiques d Evariste Galois, p. 566-576. It contains Galois' letter to Chevalier, with a short introduction by one of the editors. P Ibid. Nécrologie, Evariste Galois, p. 744-754, by Chevalier. This touching and sympathetic sketch every one should read,. 2° Magasin Pittoresque. Paris (1848), vol. 16. Evariste Galois, p. 227-28. Supposed to be written by an old school comrade, M.
    [Show full text]
  • A History of Galois Fields
    A HISTORY OF GALOIS FIELDS * Frédéric B RECHENMACHER Université d’Artois Laboratoire de mathématiques de Lens (EA 2462) & École polytechnique Département humanités et sciences sociales 91128 Palaiseau Cedex, France. ABSTRACT — This paper stresses a specific line of development of the notion of finite field, from Éva- riste Galois’s 1830 “Note sur la théorie des nombres,” and Camille Jordan’s 1870 Traité des substitutions et des équations algébriques, to Leonard Dickson’s 1901 Linear groups with an exposition of the Galois theory. This line of development highlights the key role played by some specific algebraic procedures. These in- trinsically interlaced the indexations provided by Galois’s number-theoretic imaginaries with decom- positions of the analytic representations of linear substitutions. Moreover, these procedures shed light on a key aspect of Galois’s works that had received little attention until now. The methodology of the present paper is based on investigations of intertextual references for identifying some specific collective dimensions of mathematics. We shall take as a starting point a coherent network of texts that were published mostly in France and in the U.S.A. from 1893 to 1907 (the “Galois fields network,” for short). The main shared references in this corpus were some texts published in France over the course of the 19th century, especially by Galois, Hermite, Mathieu, Serret, and Jordan. The issue of the collective dimensions underlying this network is thus especially intriguing. Indeed, the historiography of algebra has often put to the fore some specific approaches developed in Germany, with little attention to works published in France.
    [Show full text]
  • Field and Galois Theory (Graduate Texts in Mathematics 167)
    Graduate Texts in Mathematics 1 TAKEUTYZARING. Introduction to 33 HIRSCH. Differential Topology. Axiomatic Set Theory. 2nd ed. 34 SPITZER. Principles of Random Walk. 2 OXTOBY. Measure and Category. 2nd ed. 2nd ed. 3 SCHAEFER. Topological Vector Spaces. 35 WERMER. Banach Algebras and Several 4 HILT0N/STAmMnActi. A Course in Complex Variables. 2nd ed. Homological Algebra. 36 KELLEY/NANnoKA et al. Linear 5 MAC LANE. Categories for IIle Working Topological Spaces. Mathematician. 37 MONK. Mathematical Logic. 6 HUGHES/PIPER. Projective Planes. 38 GnAuERT/FRITzsom. Several Complex 7 SERRE. A Course in Arithmetic. Variables. 8 TAKEUTI/ZARING. Axiomatic Set Theory. 39 ARVESON. An Invitation to C*-Algebras. 9 HUMPHREYS. Introduction to Lie Algebras 40 KEMENY/SNELL/KNAPP. Denumerable and Representation Theory. Markov Chains. 2nd ed. 10 COHEN. A Course in Simple Homotopy 41 APOSTOL. Modular Functions and Theory. Dirichlet Series in Number Theory. 11 CONWAY. Functions of One Complex 2nd ed. Variable 1. 2nd ed. 42 SERRE. Linear Representations of Finite 12 BEALS. Advanced Mathematical Analysis. Groups. 13 ANDERSON/FULLER. Rings and Categories 43 G1LLMAN/JERISON. Rings of Continuous of Modules. 2nd ed. Functions. 14 GOLUBITSKY/GUILLEMIN. Stable Mappings 44 KENDIG. Elementary Algebraic Geometry and ,Their Singularities. 45 LoLvE. Probability Theory I. 4th ed. 15 BERBERIAN. Lectures in Functional 46 LOEVE. Probability Theory II. 4th ed. Analysis and Operator Theory. 47 MOISE. Geometric Topology in 16 WINTER. The Structure of Fields, Dimensions 2 and 3. 17 IZOSENBINIT. Random Processes. 2nd ed. 48 SAcims/Wu. General Relativity for 18 HALMOS. Measure Theory. Mathematicians. 19 HALMOS. A Hilbert Space Problem Book. 49 GRUENBERG/WEIR.
    [Show full text]
  • Field and Galois Theory
    Section 6: Field and Galois theory Matthew Macauley Department of Mathematical Sciences Clemson University http://www.math.clemson.edu/~macaule/ Math 4120, Modern Algebra M. Macauley (Clemson) Section 6: Field and Galois theory Math 4120, Modern algebra 1 / 59 Some history and the search for the quintic The quadradic formula is well-known. It gives us the two roots of a degree-2 2 polynomial ax + bx + c = 0: p −b ± b2 − 4ac x = : 1;2 2a There are formulas for cubic and quartic polynomials, but they are very complicated. For years, people wondered if there was a quintic formula. Nobody could find one. In the 1830s, 19-year-old political activist Evariste´ Galois, with no formal mathematical training proved that no such formula existed. He invented the concept of a group to solve this problem. After being challenged to a dual at age 20 that he knew he would lose, Galois spent the last few days of his life frantically writing down what he had discovered. In a final letter Galois wrote, \Later there will be, I hope, some people who will find it to their advantage to decipher all this mess." Hermann Weyl (1885{1955) described Galois' final letter as: \if judged by the novelty and profundity of ideas it contains, is perhaps the most substantial piece of writing in the whole literature of mankind." Thus was born the field of group theory! M. Macauley (Clemson) Section 6: Field and Galois theory Math 4120, Modern algebra 2 / 59 Arithmetic Most people's first exposure to mathematics comes in the form of counting.
    [Show full text]
  • Fields and Galois Theory
    Fields and Galois Theory J.S. Milne Version 4.30, April 15, 2012 These notes give a concise exposition of the theory of fields, including the Galois theory of finite and infinite extensions and the theory of transcendental extensions. BibTeX information @misc{milneFT, author={Milne, James S.}, title={Fields and Galois Theory (v4.30)}, year={2012}, note={Available at www.jmilne.org/math/}, pages={124} } v2.01 (August 21, 1996). First version on the web. v2.02 (May 27, 1998). Fixed about 40 minor errors; 57 pages. v3.00 (April 3, 2002). Revised notes; minor additions to text; added 82 exercises with solutions, an examination, and an index; 100 pages. v3.01 (August 31, 2003). Fixed many minor errors; no change to num- bering; 99 pages. v4.00 (February 19, 2005). Minor corrections and improvements; added proofs to the section on infinite Galois theory; added material to the section on transcendental extensions; 107 pages. v4.10 (January 22, 2008). Minor corrections and improvements; added proofs for Kummer theory; 111 pages. v4.20 (February 11, 2008). Replaced Maple with PARI; 111 pages. v4.21 (September 28, 2008). Minor corrections; fixed problem with hyperlinks; 111 pages. v4.22 (March 30, 2011). Minor changes; changed TEXstyle; 126 pages. v4.30 (April 15, 2012). Minor fixes; added sections on etale´ algebras; 124 pages. Available at www.jmilne.org/math/ Please send comments and corrections to me at the address on my web page. Copyright c 1996, 1998, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2008, 2011, 2012 J.S. Milne. Single paper copies for noncommercial personal use may be made without explicit permission from the copyright holder.
    [Show full text]
  • MA3D5 Galois Theory
    MA3D5 Galois theory Miles Reid Jan{Mar 2004 printed Jan 2014 Contents 1 The theory of equations 3 1.1 Primitive question . 3 1.2 Quadratic equations . 3 1.3 The remainder theorem . 4 1.4 Relation between coefficients and roots . 5 1.5 Complex roots of 1 . 7 1.6 Cubic equations . 9 1.7 Quartic equations . 10 1.8 The quintic is insoluble . 11 1.9 Prerequisites and books . 13 Exercises to Chapter 1 . 14 2 Rings and fields 18 2.1 Definitions and elementary properties . 18 2.2 Factorisation in Z ......................... 21 2.3 Factorisation in k[x] ....................... 23 2.4 Factorisation in Z[x], Eisenstein's criterion . 28 Exercises to Chapter 2 . 32 3 Basic properties of field extensions 35 3.1 Degree of extension . 35 3.2 Applications to ruler-and-compass constructions . 40 3.3 Normal extensions . 46 3.4 Application to finite fields . 51 1 3.5 Separable extensions . 53 Exercises to Chapter 3 . 56 4 Galois theory 60 4.1 Counting field homomorphisms . 60 4.2 Fixed subfields, Galois extensions . 64 4.3 The Galois correspondences and the Main Theorem . 68 4.4 Soluble groups . 73 4.5 Solving equations by radicals . 76 Exercises to Chapter 4 . 80 5 Additional material 84 5.1 Substantial examples with complicated Gal(L=k) . 84 5.2 The primitive element theorem . 84 5.3 The regular element theorem . 84 5.4 Artin{Schreier extensions . 84 5.5 Algebraic closure . 85 5.6 Transcendence degree . 85 5.7 Rings of invariants and quotients in algebraic geometry .
    [Show full text]
  • Galois Theory: the Proofs, the Whole Proofs, and Nothing but the Proofs
    GALOIS THEORY: THE PROOFS, THE WHOLE PROOFS, AND NOTHING BUT THE PROOFS MARK DICKINSON Contents 1. Notation and conventions 1 2. Field extensions 1 3. Algebraic extensions 4 4. Splitting fields 6 5. Normality 7 6. Separability 7 7. Galois extensions 8 8. Linear independence of characters 10 9. Fixed fields 13 10. The Fundamental Theorem 14 I’ve adopted a slightly different method of proof from the textbook for many of the Galois theory results. For your reference, here’s a summary of the main results and their proofs, without any of that pesky history and motivation—or distracting examples—to get in the way. Just the proofs1. Almost all of the hard work lies in three main theorems: Corollary 7.9 (a splitting field of a separable polynomial is Galois), Theorem 8.1 (linear independence of characters), and Theorem 9.1 (the degree of K over KH is bounded by the order of H). 1. Notation and conventions For groups H and G, we write H < G to mean that H is a (not necessarily proper) subgroup of G. Similarly, for sets S and T , we write S ⊂ T to indicate that S is a (not necessarily proper) subset of T . 2. Field extensions Definition 2.1. A field extension K/F is a triple (F, K, i) consisting of fields F and K together with a field homomorphism i : F → K. When there is no danger of confusion F will be identified with its image i(F ) under i, and so regarded as a subfield of K.
    [Show full text]
  • History of Algebra
    History of Algebra The term algebra usually denotes various kinds of mathematical ideas and techniques, more or less directly associated with formal manipulation of abstract symbols and/or with finding the solutions of an equation. The notion that in mathematics there is such a sepa- rate sub-discipline, as well as the very use of the term “algebra” to denote it, are them- selves the outcome of historical evolution of ideas. The ideas to be discussed in this article are sometimes put under the same heading due to historical circumstances no less than to any “essential” mathematical reason. Part I. The long way towards the idea of “equation” Simple and natural as the notion of “equation” may appear now, it involves a great amount of mutually interacting, individual mathematical notions, each of which was the outcome of a long and intricate historical process. Not before the work of Viète, in the late sixteenth century, do we actually find a fully consolidated idea of an equation in the sense of a sin- gle mathematical entity comprising two sides on which operations can be simultaneously performed. By performing such operations the equation itself remains unchanged, but we are led to discovering the value of the unknown quantities appearing in it. Three main threads in the process leading to this consolidation deserve special attention here: (1) attempts to deal with problems devoted to finding the values of one or more unknown quantities. In Part I, the word “equation” is used in this context as a short-hand to denote all such problems,
    [Show full text]
  • Section 14.6. Today We Discuss Galois Groups of Polynomials. Let Us Briefly Recall What We Know Already
    Section 14.6. Today we discuss Galois groups of polynomials. Let us briefly recall what we know already. If L=F is a Galois extension, then L is the splitting field of a separable polynomial f(x) 2 F [x]. If f(x) factors into a product of irreducible polynomials f(x) = f1(x) : : : fk(x) with degrees deg(fj) = nj, the Galois group Gal(L=F ) embeds into the following product of symmetric groups: Gal(L=F ) ⊂ Sn1 × · · · × Snk ⊂ Sn; where n = n1 + ··· + nk. Moreover, Gal(L=F ) acts transitively on the set of roots of each irreducible factor. The following two examples are also well-known to us by now. The Galois 2 2 group of (x − 2)(x − 3) is isomorphic to the Klein 4-group K4 ⊂ S4 and the Galois group 3 of x − 2 is isomorphic to S6. In what follows we shall describe Galois groups of polynomials of degrees less than or equal to 4, and prove that the Galois group of a \general" polynomial of degree n is isomorphic to Sn. Definition 1. Let x1; : : : ; xn be indeterminates. Define k-th elementary symmetric function by X ek = ek(x1; : : : ; xn) = xi1 : : : xin : 16i1<···<ik6n For example, we have e0(x1; x2; x3) = 1; e1(x1; x2; x3) = x1 + x2 + xn; e2(x1; x2; x3) = x1x2 + x1x3 + x2x3; e3(x1; x2; x3) = x1x2x3: Definition 2. Again, let x1; : : : ; xn be indeterminates. Then the general polynomial of degree n is defined as the product (x − x1) ::: (x − xn): It is easy to see that n X k n−k (x − x1) ::: (x − xn) = (−1) ek(x1; : : : ; xn)x k=0 With the above definition, we see that for any field F , the extension F (x1; : : : ; xn) is the splitting field for the general polynomial of degree n.
    [Show full text]