3. Examples
Last lecture we defined what it means that a polynomial with coefficients in a field is solvable by radicals over
. Namely, there is a tower of extensions
where for each
there is a positive integer
such that
and such that
An obvious class of examples comes from considering polynomials of the form
- If
then
- If
the roots of
are all the numbers of the form
where
(Remember the convention that if
then
denotes the unique positive real whose
-th power is
) One obvious way of adding the roots of
to
consists in first adding
and then adding
Clearly, any field containing these two numbers will contain all the numbers of the form
so this will indeed give us an extension containing
This shows that
is solvable by radicals, since we can form the tower
where
so
and we can take
and
so
so we can take
Since
we are done.
- If
the roots of
are the numbers of the form
where
This is because all the numbers
are different, since they are
-th roots of unity, and
Again,
is an extension by radicals, as witnessed by the tower
where
and
Proposition 1 If
is a quadratic polynomial, then
is solvable by radicals over
![]()
Proof: Let where
and
Let
Remember our convention that if
this is the number
Consider the tower
Note that since the roots of
are the numbers
Also, this is an extension by radicals, since
Proposition 2 If
is a cubic polynomial, then
is solvable by radicals over
![]()
Proof: The argument is similar to the previous one. We use Cardano’s method rather than the quadratic formula, see lecture 2.1. I briefly go through the steps:
Say that where
and
Let where
and
so
Since the roots of
and the roots of
are the same, it suffices to show that
is solvable by radicals.
Let where
and
Notice
Also, for any complex number
is a root of
iff
is a root of
Since
any field that contains
will contain
and vice versa. It follows that it suffices to show that
is solvable by radicals.
Let so
As shown in Proposition 1,
is solvable by radicals and there is a tower
witnessing this, with
This is to say
and
(According to the proof of Proposition 1,
but this is not important right now.)
Let be a root of
so
Let
be a cubic root of
The other two cubic roots of
are
and
where
Hence, we can extend our tower to
where
and
Finally, notice that the roots of are the three numbers
and
These three numbers belong to
and it follows that
so
is solvable by radicals and therefore so is
Proposition 3 If
is a quartic polynomial, then
is solvable by radicals over
.
Proof: This is similar to the previous case, but now we use Ferrari’s method, see lecture 2.2.
Briefly, just as in the previous case, we may assume
Let By Proposition 2,
is solvable by radicals over
and, in fact, there is a tower
with
witnessing this. That is to say,
Fix a root of
Extend the tower above as
where and
This is still an extension by radicals, since
Also,
Using that
we may assume that
since otherwise we may replace
with
and now the equation holds.
Then factors as a product of two quadratics in
(But these quadratics do not necessarily have coefficients in
much less in
) Using (the proof of) Proposition 1, we can further extend the tower as
where and both quadratics factor in
This shows that
is solvable by radicals.
Notice that we could have made the tower above slightly shorter, since we did not need all cubic roots of any of them would have worked.
We have shown that any polynomial with coefficients in of degree at most 4 is solvable by radicals. In fact, the formulas we have for the roots of these polynomials allowed us to find the required tower of extensions in a “uniform” way.
The method above is fairly general. For example, we have the same result if instead of a polynomial over we had started with a polynomial in
for any other subfield
of
On the other hand, if a polynomial is not solvable by radicals, then it is certainly the case that there is no “formula” that from the coefficients of the polynomial returns the values of its roots, as long as by formula we understand any expression formed from these coefficients (and other numbers in the field
) by means of the elementary operations and the extraction of
-th roots.
A final remark is in order. The method above also works for other fields; for example, for almost all finite fields. There are two problems, though. The first is that to even define we need to begin with an extension field of
in which
factors. (This field would play the role of
.) Such a field always exists, in fact, a version of the fundamental theorem of algebra holds for any field: For any
there is an extension
of
such that any polynomial with coefficients in
(in particular, any polynomial with coefficients in
) factors in
However, in this course we do not have the tools to show that this is the case.
The second problem is more subtle. Consider, for example, the quadratic We cannot do as usual to solve the equation
(i.e.,
)—not even formally, without worrying about which field the solutions live in.
I mean, we cannot use the quadratic formula to solve this equation. This is because in
so the expression
makes no sense, since it requires that we divide by 2.
Nevertheless, it turns out that is solvable by radicals over
, because all the nonzero elements of
the field with 4 elements, satisfy the equation
and, as mentioned in example 3 following Lemma 4 of the notes for last lecture, we know that the roots of
are simply the two new elements of
Similarly, if we begin with a field of characteristic 2 or 3, we cannot use Cardano’s method to show that a polynomial
of degree 3 is solvable by radicals over
since this method requires that at some point we divide some element of the field (or of an extension) by 2 and another by 3. The same problem occurs with Ferrari’s method for equations of degree 4.
Unfortunately, it would take us far afield to see whether Propositions 1, 2, and 3 hold for all fields (finite or infinite, and of any characteristic), so I will live this question unanswered.
Typeset using LaTeX2WP. Here is a printable version of this post.
[…] 305 -Extensions by radicals (3): 3. Examples – http://caicedoteaching.wordpress.com/2009/03/08/305-extensions-by-radicals-3/ […]