Galois Theory — Fundamentals
00 · Symbol Glossary
The group of all bijective ring homomorphisms , under composition — a field's own internal symmetries.
— the automorphisms of that leave completely untouched. The central object of this chapter.
, for — the elements no automorphism in can move.
The automorphism , viewed only as a map on a smaller subfield it happens to preserve — valid whenever .
01 · Automorphisms of a Field Extension
For an extension , define .
The only -automorphisms of send or . There are exactly two, so the Galois group is . Every root of must map to a root, which is why only these two choices appear.
is a group under composition.
Identity: fixes pointwise. Closure: if both fix pointwise, so does : for . Inverses: if fixes , applying to gives , so also fixes pointwise. Associativity is inherited from function composition.
02 · Automorphisms Permute Roots
If and satisfies for some , then too.
Write (). Since is a ring homomorphism fixing : .
If is the splitting field of with roots , then every is completely determined by the permutation it induces on , giving an injective homomorphism .
By Theorem 20.2, permutes among themselves (a root maps to a root of the same polynomial, and the roots are exactly this finite set). Since , every element of is an -polynomial expression in the 's; since fixes and is determined on each , it is determined on every such expression, hence on all of . The map is therefore an injective function into , and it's a homomorphism since composing automorphisms composes the induced permutations.
03 · Counting the Galois Group
If is the splitting field over of a separable polynomial , then .
The induction has to be run on a stronger statement than the theorem itself, in the same shape as Theorem 19.2 — counting extensions of an arbitrary base isomorphism, not just automorphisms over a fixed base field. (Counting only automorphisms would leave no way to handle the intermediate stages, where gets sent to a different root and the base map is no longer the identity.)
Claim. Let be a field isomorphism, separable, a splitting field of over , and a splitting field of over . Then the number of isomorphisms extending is exactly .
Theorem 20.1 is the special case , , : an isomorphism extending is precisely an element of .
Proof of the Claim, by induction on .
If , then , so splits into linear factors over ; applying coefficientwise to that factorization shows splits over , so and itself is the only extension: exactly .
If , pick a root of , with minimal polynomial over of degree (Theorem 18.4). Then is an irreducible factor of , so is an irreducible factor of (irreducibility transfers across , as in Theorem 19.2's proof), and has distinct roots in — distinct because is separable and carries 's factorization over to 's, preserving the absence of repeated roots.
Counting the possible images of . Any extension of must send to a root of in (apply to coefficientwise, exactly as in Theorem 20.2), so there are at most choices for . Conversely, for each of the roots of in , Theorem 18.4's identifications and compose with to give exactly one isomorphism extending with — unique because the basis means the image of determines the map completely.
Counting the extensions of each . Fix such an . Then is a splitting field of over (adjoining 's roots to the bigger base still gives ), and is a splitting field of over , with (Tower Law). The induction hypothesis, applied to the base isomorphism , gives exactly isomorphisms extending .
Combining. Every extension of restricts on to for exactly one root , so the extensions of are partitioned according to that choice — classes, each of size :
by the Tower Law. This proves the Claim, and with it .
The proof needed " distinct roots" at each stage — exactly the separability hypothesis from Theorem 19.4. Without it, an irreducible factor could have fewer than distinct roots (a phenomenon possible only in characteristic ), undercounting the automorphisms and breaking the equality. Since this course works over characteristic-0 base fields throughout, separability is automatic (Chapter 19, Section 05) and this subtlety never actually bites — but it explains why textbooks state this theorem with the separability hypothesis spelled out.
04 · Fixed Fields
For , .
, and is a field.
: every fixes pointwise by definition, so . Field: if , then for any , (ring homomorphism) so ; similarly , so ; and if , (Theorem 13.2), so . By the subfield analog of Theorem 11.6, is a field.
05 · The Fundamental Theorem of Galois Theory
Let be the splitting field over of a separable polynomial, and . There is an inclusion-reversing bijection between subgroups and intermediate fields , given by and , satisfying:
(a) and .
(b) is itself a splitting field over (equivalently, "normal") if and only if , in which case .
Part (a)'s formula for the specific intermediate fields built from a subgroup follows immediately from Theorem 20.1 (applied with base field instead of — remains a splitting field of the same separable polynomial over the larger base ). The remaining fact needed for full generality — that exactly, for every intermediate field , so that the correspondence is a genuine bijection touching every subgroup and every intermediate field — is a real theorem (often called Artin's Lemma, on the linear independence of distinct field automorphisms as functions) that we take as given here, in the same spirit as the field of fractions and algebraic closure constructions. Part (b)'s harder direction (normal subgroup splitting field) also relies on it. This chapter proves everything else directly.
If and is itself the splitting field over of some , then , and .
for every . Since for the roots of , and permutes these roots among themselves (Theorem 20.2), maps (generated by the over , with fixing ) onto itself.
Normality. For , , and : since , , so (as fixes pointwise). Then . So fixes pointwise for every , i.e. . Hence .
The quotient isomorphism. Since for every , define by (the restriction, a genuine automorphism of fixing , by the previous paragraph). is a homomorphism: .
, exactly.
Surjective: given any , apply Theorem 19.2 (Isomorphism Extension Theorem) with the base isomorphism and the polynomial — the separable polynomial whose splitting field over is (not : since is already the splitting field of over , splits completely inside , so the splitting field of over is itself, not ). Two facts make Theorem 19.2 applicable: is the splitting field of over as well as over (adjoining 's roots to the larger base still produces exactly ), and , since 's coefficients lie in and fixes pointwise. So extends to an isomorphism , i.e. an automorphism of . It fixes pointwise because it restricts to on and fixes . Hence and .
By the First Isomorphism Theorem (Theorem 6.5): , i.e. .
06 · A Worked Galois Group
is nonabelian. Chapter 21 shows this single fact — the Galois group failing to be solvable in a specific group-theoretic sense — is exactly what would obstruct expressing a cubic's roots by radicals, except that (unlike and beyond) happens to still be solvable, consistent with the classical fact that cubics do have a radical formula (Cardano's).
07 · Exercises
Apply Theorem 20.1 directly: is separable over , and what is ?
has characteristic 0, so (irreducible, Chapter 18) is separable. . By Theorem 20.1, : the Galois group has exactly two elements, the identity and the automorphism sending .
Find using Theorem 20.1, and describe its nonidentity element.
Apply Corollary 20.3: how many roots does have, and what's the largest possible embedding target?
has 3 roots, so by Corollary 20.3, embeds into , which has order . Combined with Theorem 20.1 giving exactly (Section 06), the embedding must be onto: every permutation of the 3 roots is realized by some automorphism.
Explain, using Corollary 20.3 and Section 06's computation, why must act as all of on the three roots of , not just some subgroup.
Recall from Chapter 19 that is not itself a splitting field. Apply Theorem 20.6's hypothesis check.
is not a splitting field of any polynomial over that has as a root while staying inside — specifically, 's other two roots () are not in , so fails to contain all roots of the polynomial it's generated by. Theorem 20.6's hypothesis (" is itself the splitting field of some over ") is not met, so the theorem gives no conclusion about whether is normal in — and indeed it is not (a subgroup of order inside , generated by a single transposition, is never normal in , matching 's well-known subgroup structure).
Does Theorem 20.6 apply to inside ? Explain why or why not.
08 · Chapter Summary
| Concept | Statement |
|---|---|
| Automorphisms of fixing pointwise; a group (Thm 20.1a) | |
| Automorphisms permute roots | sends roots of to roots of (Thm 20.2) |
| Embedding into | for a splitting field with roots (Cor 20.3) |
| Order formula | for separable splitting fields (Thm 20.1) |
| Fixed field | Intermediate field between and (Thm 20.4) |
| Fundamental Theorem | Bijective, inclusion-reversing correspondence (Thm 20.5) |
| Normal subextensions | Splitting subfield , (Thm 20.6) |
| , nonabelian |
Next: Chapter 21 — Galois Theory: Solvability by Radicals connects the group-theoretic structure of to whether a polynomial's roots can be expressed using radicals, culminating in the classical proof that no such formula exists for general degree-5 polynomials.