Finite normal extension as a splitting field Created 2026-09-24 Updated 2026-09-24
A finite extension is normal exactly when it is the splitting field over of some polynomial. For the forward direction, multiply the minimal polynomials of finitely many generators of ; normality puts all their roots in . The reverse direction follows because a -embedding permutes the roots of a polynomial and hence preserves its splitting field.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2016 iii Paper 101 4 Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-06
An integral domain is an integrally closed domain if every element of its fraction field which is an integral element over belongs to . Explicitly, if satisfiesthen . Thus .
Suppose is a unique factorization domain and is integral, with , , and with no common irreducible element as a factor. Multiplying its monic equation by givesHence divides . Every irreducible element dividing is a prime element, so it would divide , contrary to the choice of the fraction. Therefore is a unit, and . We have proved
The going-down theorem is the following. Let be an integral extension of integral domains with an integrally closed domain. IfthenWe first prove this for a module-finite ring extension and then remove that extra hypothesis. We use the Lying-over theorem, the Going-up theorem, and the incomparability theorem for integral extensions: primes exist over every base prime, prime chains can be extended upwards, and distinct primes over the same base prime cannot contain one another. The Going-up theorem follows by applying the Lying-over theorem to the quotient by the lower prime. These results concern arbitrary integral extensions; none assumes the going-down theorem.
For the finite case, let and . Since is module-finite, is a finite field extension. Take a finite normal field extension containing , obtained as a splitting field of the minimal polynomials of finitely many field generators. The extension need not be a separable field extension. Let be the integral closure of in . Then , and is integral over both and .
We need one auxiliary fact: the finite group acts transitively on the prime ideals of over any fixed prime ideal of . First observe that an element fixed by all of is a purely inseparable algebraic element over . Indeed, all -embeddings of into an algebraic closure extend to -automorphisms of the normal field extension . Hence the minimal polynomial of an algebraic element has only one distinct root. In characteristic zero this says ; in characteristic it says for some .
Now let be primes of over , and suppose is different from every , . By the incomparability theorem for integral extensions, is contained in none of these conjugate primes. The prime avoidance lemma suppliesThe productis fixed by , is integral over , and lies in because one factor is . Choose an exponent equal to in characteristic zero, or a power of in characteristic , such that . Since is an integrally closed domain, . It also lies in , hence in . Because is a prime ideal, some factor lies in . This means , contradicting our choice. Thus for some , proving transitivity. The power accounts for the possible purely inseparable field extension and makes the argument valid in every characteristic.
Lift the prescribed to a prime of by the Lying-over theorem for . Separately, choose a prime over and use the Going-up theorem to find over . Transitivity gives with . ThenContracting to gives with the required contraction. This proves the going-down theorem for the module-finite case.
For a general integral extension , consider and the idealWe claim that is disjoint from . Otherwise, clearing the finitely many denominators in an expression for an element givesThe subalgebra is a module-finite ring extension of , since all its generators are integral elements. Apply the finite case to : there is a prime contracting to . The displayed identity puts in , but . Thus , a contradiction.
Localize further at the multiplicative subset . The extension of is a proper ideal, by the disjointness just proved. Choose a maximal ideal containing it and contract back to a prime ideal of . This prime contains and avoids . Its contraction to lies inside by the prime ideal correspondence for localization, and its contraction to is exactly . This completes the proof of the going-down theorem without any finite generation assumption on .
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2017 ii Paper 3 16I a Solution Created 2026-09-24 Updated 2026-10-05
Write , where since is a finite-dimensional vector space over its prime field. Every nonzero element satisfies by Lagrange theorem, so is exactly the splitting field of over . The derivative is , making it a separable polynomial. Thus the extension is a normal field extension and a separable field extension, hence a Galois extension.
The finite-field Frobenius automorphism fixes and has . If with , all elements would be roots of the degree- polynomial , impossible. It has order , equal to the degree of the Galois extension. Therefore
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2023 ii Paper 1 18I a Solution Created 2026-09-24 Updated 2026-09-25
A finite extension is normal when every irreducible polynomial in having one root in splits completely over .
Suppose first that is normal. Choose with , and let be the minimal polynomial of over . Every splits in by normality, and is generated by their roots because it is already generated by the particular roots . Thus is the splitting field of .
Conversely, suppose that is the splitting field of . Every -embedding permutes the roots of , so . By the embedding characterization of normality, is normal. This proves the finite normal extension as a splitting field criterion.