Computing $phi(frac32)$ where $phi$ is an automorphism of $mathbb Q[sqrt2]$ such that $phi(1)=1$ and...












6












$begingroup$


This question is a followup to this question about Field Automorphisms of $mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$.



Since $mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$ is a vector space over $mathbb{Q}$ with basis ${1, sqrt{2}}$, I naively understand why it is the case that automorphisms $phi$ of $mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$ are determined wholly by the image of $1$ and $sqrt{2}$. My problem is using this fact explicitly. For example, suppose I consider the automorphism $phi$ such that $phi(1) = 1$ and $phi(sqrt{2}) = sqrt{2}$, and I want to compute the value of $phileft(frac{3}{2}right)$. I can do the following:



$$ phileft(frac{3}{2}right) = phi(3) phileft(frac{1}{2}right) = [phi(1) + phi(1) + phi(1)] phileft(frac{1}{2}right) = 3phileft(frac{1}{2}right).$$



I am unsure how to proceed from here. I would assume that it is true that $$phileft(frac{1}{1 + 1}right) = frac{phi(1)}{phi(1) + phi(1)} = frac{1}{2},$$ but I don't know what property of ring isomorphisms would allow me to do this.






abstract-algebra ring-theory field-theory galois-theory







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$

















    6












    $begingroup$


    This question is a followup to this question about Field Automorphisms of $mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$.



    Since $mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$ is a vector space over $mathbb{Q}$ with basis ${1, sqrt{2}}$, I naively understand why it is the case that automorphisms $phi$ of $mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$ are determined wholly by the image of $1$ and $sqrt{2}$. My problem is using this fact explicitly. For example, suppose I consider the automorphism $phi$ such that $phi(1) = 1$ and $phi(sqrt{2}) = sqrt{2}$, and I want to compute the value of $phileft(frac{3}{2}right)$. I can do the following:



    $$ phileft(frac{3}{2}right) = phi(3) phileft(frac{1}{2}right) = [phi(1) + phi(1) + phi(1)] phileft(frac{1}{2}right) = 3phileft(frac{1}{2}right).$$



    I am unsure how to proceed from here. I would assume that it is true that $$phileft(frac{1}{1 + 1}right) = frac{phi(1)}{phi(1) + phi(1)} = frac{1}{2},$$ but I don't know what property of ring isomorphisms would allow me to do this.






    abstract-algebra ring-theory field-theory galois-theory







    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$















      6












      6








      6





      $begingroup$


      This question is a followup to this question about Field Automorphisms of $mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$.



      Since $mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$ is a vector space over $mathbb{Q}$ with basis ${1, sqrt{2}}$, I naively understand why it is the case that automorphisms $phi$ of $mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$ are determined wholly by the image of $1$ and $sqrt{2}$. My problem is using this fact explicitly. For example, suppose I consider the automorphism $phi$ such that $phi(1) = 1$ and $phi(sqrt{2}) = sqrt{2}$, and I want to compute the value of $phileft(frac{3}{2}right)$. I can do the following:



      $$ phileft(frac{3}{2}right) = phi(3) phileft(frac{1}{2}right) = [phi(1) + phi(1) + phi(1)] phileft(frac{1}{2}right) = 3phileft(frac{1}{2}right).$$



      I am unsure how to proceed from here. I would assume that it is true that $$phileft(frac{1}{1 + 1}right) = frac{phi(1)}{phi(1) + phi(1)} = frac{1}{2},$$ but I don't know what property of ring isomorphisms would allow me to do this.






      abstract-algebra ring-theory field-theory galois-theory







      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      This question is a followup to this question about Field Automorphisms of $mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$.



      Since $mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$ is a vector space over $mathbb{Q}$ with basis ${1, sqrt{2}}$, I naively understand why it is the case that automorphisms $phi$ of $mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$ are determined wholly by the image of $1$ and $sqrt{2}$. My problem is using this fact explicitly. For example, suppose I consider the automorphism $phi$ such that $phi(1) = 1$ and $phi(sqrt{2}) = sqrt{2}$, and I want to compute the value of $phileft(frac{3}{2}right)$. I can do the following:



      $$ phileft(frac{3}{2}right) = phi(3) phileft(frac{1}{2}right) = [phi(1) + phi(1) + phi(1)] phileft(frac{1}{2}right) = 3phileft(frac{1}{2}right).$$



      I am unsure how to proceed from here. I would assume that it is true that $$phileft(frac{1}{1 + 1}right) = frac{phi(1)}{phi(1) + phi(1)} = frac{1}{2},$$ but I don't know what property of ring isomorphisms would allow me to do this.






      abstract-algebra ring-theory field-theory galois-theory




      abstract-algebra ring-theory field-theory galois-theory






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Apr 17 at 9:47









      Asaf Karagila♦

      309k33441775




      309k33441775










      asked Apr 17 at 1:08









      Solarflare0Solarflare0

      11814




      11814






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          6












          $begingroup$

          $$
          2phi(frac{3}{2}) = phi(3) = 3phi(1) = 3
          implies
          phi(frac{3}{2}) =frac{3}{2}
          $$
          Generalizing this argument gives $phi(q) = q$ for all $q in mathbb Q$.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$









          • 1




            $begingroup$
            In the interest of clarity's sake it might be worth noting this is the multiplicative property of ring/field homomorphisms, i.e. $phi(xy)=phi(x)phi(y)$, under the consideration $3 = 3cdot 1$.
            $endgroup$
            – Eevee Trainer
            Apr 17 at 5:28






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @EeveeTrainer, I don't think it is. In a ring $2t=t+t$ and this calculation can be justified purely by the additiveness of the homomorphism once we know $phi(1)=1$. .
            $endgroup$
            – ancientmathematician
            Apr 17 at 7:11





















          5












          $begingroup$

          Every automorphism fixes $mathbb{Q}$. That is, if $K$ is any field of characteristic zero, then any automorphism of $K$ fixes the unique subfield of $K$ isomorphic to $mathbb{Q}$.



          For the proof, we assume WLOG that $mathbb{Q} subseteq K$. Then:




          • $phi$ fixes $0$ and $1$, by definition.


          • $phi$ fixes all positive integers, since $phi(n) = phi(1 + 1 + cdots + 1) = n phi(1) = n$.


          • $phi$ fixes all negative integers, since $phi(n) + phi(-n) = phi(n-n) = 0$, so $phi(-n) = -phi(n) = -n$.


          • $phi$ fixes all rational numbers, since $n cdot phileft(frac{m}{n}right) = phi(m) = m$, so $phileft(frac{m}{n}right) = frac{m}{n}$.




          More generally, when we consider automorphisms of a field extension $K / F$, we often restrict our attention only to automorphisms which fix the base field $F$. But when $F = mathbb{Q}$, since all automorphisms fix $mathbb{Q}$, such a restriction is unnecessary.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$














            Your Answer








            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "69"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3190546%2fcomputing-phi-frac32-where-phi-is-an-automorphism-of-mathbb-q-sqrt2%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            6












            $begingroup$

            $$
            2phi(frac{3}{2}) = phi(3) = 3phi(1) = 3
            implies
            phi(frac{3}{2}) =frac{3}{2}
            $$
            Generalizing this argument gives $phi(q) = q$ for all $q in mathbb Q$.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$









            • 1




              $begingroup$
              In the interest of clarity's sake it might be worth noting this is the multiplicative property of ring/field homomorphisms, i.e. $phi(xy)=phi(x)phi(y)$, under the consideration $3 = 3cdot 1$.
              $endgroup$
              – Eevee Trainer
              Apr 17 at 5:28






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              @EeveeTrainer, I don't think it is. In a ring $2t=t+t$ and this calculation can be justified purely by the additiveness of the homomorphism once we know $phi(1)=1$. .
              $endgroup$
              – ancientmathematician
              Apr 17 at 7:11


















            6












            $begingroup$

            $$
            2phi(frac{3}{2}) = phi(3) = 3phi(1) = 3
            implies
            phi(frac{3}{2}) =frac{3}{2}
            $$
            Generalizing this argument gives $phi(q) = q$ for all $q in mathbb Q$.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$









            • 1




              $begingroup$
              In the interest of clarity's sake it might be worth noting this is the multiplicative property of ring/field homomorphisms, i.e. $phi(xy)=phi(x)phi(y)$, under the consideration $3 = 3cdot 1$.
              $endgroup$
              – Eevee Trainer
              Apr 17 at 5:28






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              @EeveeTrainer, I don't think it is. In a ring $2t=t+t$ and this calculation can be justified purely by the additiveness of the homomorphism once we know $phi(1)=1$. .
              $endgroup$
              – ancientmathematician
              Apr 17 at 7:11
















            6












            6








            6





            $begingroup$

            $$
            2phi(frac{3}{2}) = phi(3) = 3phi(1) = 3
            implies
            phi(frac{3}{2}) =frac{3}{2}
            $$
            Generalizing this argument gives $phi(q) = q$ for all $q in mathbb Q$.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$



            $$
            2phi(frac{3}{2}) = phi(3) = 3phi(1) = 3
            implies
            phi(frac{3}{2}) =frac{3}{2}
            $$
            Generalizing this argument gives $phi(q) = q$ for all $q in mathbb Q$.







            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered Apr 17 at 1:12









            lhflhf

            168k11173405




            168k11173405








            • 1




              $begingroup$
              In the interest of clarity's sake it might be worth noting this is the multiplicative property of ring/field homomorphisms, i.e. $phi(xy)=phi(x)phi(y)$, under the consideration $3 = 3cdot 1$.
              $endgroup$
              – Eevee Trainer
              Apr 17 at 5:28






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              @EeveeTrainer, I don't think it is. In a ring $2t=t+t$ and this calculation can be justified purely by the additiveness of the homomorphism once we know $phi(1)=1$. .
              $endgroup$
              – ancientmathematician
              Apr 17 at 7:11
















            • 1




              $begingroup$
              In the interest of clarity's sake it might be worth noting this is the multiplicative property of ring/field homomorphisms, i.e. $phi(xy)=phi(x)phi(y)$, under the consideration $3 = 3cdot 1$.
              $endgroup$
              – Eevee Trainer
              Apr 17 at 5:28






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              @EeveeTrainer, I don't think it is. In a ring $2t=t+t$ and this calculation can be justified purely by the additiveness of the homomorphism once we know $phi(1)=1$. .
              $endgroup$
              – ancientmathematician
              Apr 17 at 7:11










            1




            1




            $begingroup$
            In the interest of clarity's sake it might be worth noting this is the multiplicative property of ring/field homomorphisms, i.e. $phi(xy)=phi(x)phi(y)$, under the consideration $3 = 3cdot 1$.
            $endgroup$
            – Eevee Trainer
            Apr 17 at 5:28




            $begingroup$
            In the interest of clarity's sake it might be worth noting this is the multiplicative property of ring/field homomorphisms, i.e. $phi(xy)=phi(x)phi(y)$, under the consideration $3 = 3cdot 1$.
            $endgroup$
            – Eevee Trainer
            Apr 17 at 5:28




            1




            1




            $begingroup$
            @EeveeTrainer, I don't think it is. In a ring $2t=t+t$ and this calculation can be justified purely by the additiveness of the homomorphism once we know $phi(1)=1$. .
            $endgroup$
            – ancientmathematician
            Apr 17 at 7:11






            $begingroup$
            @EeveeTrainer, I don't think it is. In a ring $2t=t+t$ and this calculation can be justified purely by the additiveness of the homomorphism once we know $phi(1)=1$. .
            $endgroup$
            – ancientmathematician
            Apr 17 at 7:11













            5












            $begingroup$

            Every automorphism fixes $mathbb{Q}$. That is, if $K$ is any field of characteristic zero, then any automorphism of $K$ fixes the unique subfield of $K$ isomorphic to $mathbb{Q}$.



            For the proof, we assume WLOG that $mathbb{Q} subseteq K$. Then:




            • $phi$ fixes $0$ and $1$, by definition.


            • $phi$ fixes all positive integers, since $phi(n) = phi(1 + 1 + cdots + 1) = n phi(1) = n$.


            • $phi$ fixes all negative integers, since $phi(n) + phi(-n) = phi(n-n) = 0$, so $phi(-n) = -phi(n) = -n$.


            • $phi$ fixes all rational numbers, since $n cdot phileft(frac{m}{n}right) = phi(m) = m$, so $phileft(frac{m}{n}right) = frac{m}{n}$.




            More generally, when we consider automorphisms of a field extension $K / F$, we often restrict our attention only to automorphisms which fix the base field $F$. But when $F = mathbb{Q}$, since all automorphisms fix $mathbb{Q}$, such a restriction is unnecessary.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$


















              5












              $begingroup$

              Every automorphism fixes $mathbb{Q}$. That is, if $K$ is any field of characteristic zero, then any automorphism of $K$ fixes the unique subfield of $K$ isomorphic to $mathbb{Q}$.



              For the proof, we assume WLOG that $mathbb{Q} subseteq K$. Then:




              • $phi$ fixes $0$ and $1$, by definition.


              • $phi$ fixes all positive integers, since $phi(n) = phi(1 + 1 + cdots + 1) = n phi(1) = n$.


              • $phi$ fixes all negative integers, since $phi(n) + phi(-n) = phi(n-n) = 0$, so $phi(-n) = -phi(n) = -n$.


              • $phi$ fixes all rational numbers, since $n cdot phileft(frac{m}{n}right) = phi(m) = m$, so $phileft(frac{m}{n}right) = frac{m}{n}$.




              More generally, when we consider automorphisms of a field extension $K / F$, we often restrict our attention only to automorphisms which fix the base field $F$. But when $F = mathbb{Q}$, since all automorphisms fix $mathbb{Q}$, such a restriction is unnecessary.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$
















                5












                5








                5





                $begingroup$

                Every automorphism fixes $mathbb{Q}$. That is, if $K$ is any field of characteristic zero, then any automorphism of $K$ fixes the unique subfield of $K$ isomorphic to $mathbb{Q}$.



                For the proof, we assume WLOG that $mathbb{Q} subseteq K$. Then:




                • $phi$ fixes $0$ and $1$, by definition.


                • $phi$ fixes all positive integers, since $phi(n) = phi(1 + 1 + cdots + 1) = n phi(1) = n$.


                • $phi$ fixes all negative integers, since $phi(n) + phi(-n) = phi(n-n) = 0$, so $phi(-n) = -phi(n) = -n$.


                • $phi$ fixes all rational numbers, since $n cdot phileft(frac{m}{n}right) = phi(m) = m$, so $phileft(frac{m}{n}right) = frac{m}{n}$.




                More generally, when we consider automorphisms of a field extension $K / F$, we often restrict our attention only to automorphisms which fix the base field $F$. But when $F = mathbb{Q}$, since all automorphisms fix $mathbb{Q}$, such a restriction is unnecessary.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$



                Every automorphism fixes $mathbb{Q}$. That is, if $K$ is any field of characteristic zero, then any automorphism of $K$ fixes the unique subfield of $K$ isomorphic to $mathbb{Q}$.



                For the proof, we assume WLOG that $mathbb{Q} subseteq K$. Then:




                • $phi$ fixes $0$ and $1$, by definition.


                • $phi$ fixes all positive integers, since $phi(n) = phi(1 + 1 + cdots + 1) = n phi(1) = n$.


                • $phi$ fixes all negative integers, since $phi(n) + phi(-n) = phi(n-n) = 0$, so $phi(-n) = -phi(n) = -n$.


                • $phi$ fixes all rational numbers, since $n cdot phileft(frac{m}{n}right) = phi(m) = m$, so $phileft(frac{m}{n}right) = frac{m}{n}$.




                More generally, when we consider automorphisms of a field extension $K / F$, we often restrict our attention only to automorphisms which fix the base field $F$. But when $F = mathbb{Q}$, since all automorphisms fix $mathbb{Q}$, such a restriction is unnecessary.







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered Apr 17 at 1:30









                60056005

                37.2k753127




                37.2k753127






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid …



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3190546%2fcomputing-phi-frac32-where-phi-is-an-automorphism-of-mathbb-q-sqrt2%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    -

                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Plaza Victoria

                    Image
                    Plaza Victoria Plaza Victoria en 2017 Otros nombres Plaza de La Victoria Localización El Almendral, Valparaíso, Chile Vías adyacentes Chacabuco, Molina, Plaza Victoria y Edwards Creación 1841 Metro Bellavista Ubicación 33°02′46″S 71°37′11″O  /  -33.04624167, -71.61980833 Coordenadas: 33°02′46″S 71°37′11″O  /  -33.04624167, -71.61980833 [editar datos en Wikidata] La Plaza Victoria , también llamada Plaza de la Victoria , [ 1 ] ​ es una plaza ubicada en el sector El Almendral del plan de la ciudad de Valparaíso, Chile, de importancia patrimonial, que incluye valiosas estatuas y especies vegetales. [ 2 ] ​ La plaza se creó como tal en la primera mitad del siglo XIX, tomando previamente los nombres de Plaza Nueva y Plaza de Orrego . Si bien desde sus inicios tuvo relevancia histórica, no fue sino a partir de fines de los años 1860 cuando comenzó a cobrar mayor importancia y se convirtió en uno de los principales centros sociales de l
                    Read more

                    Puebla de Zaragoza

                    Image
                    Para otros usos de este término, véase Puebla (desambiguación). Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza Localidad De arriba a abajo de izquierda a derecha: Estrella de Puebla, Volcán Popocatépetl, Catedral de Puebla, Monumento a Ignacio Zaragoza, Estadio Cuauhtémoc, Angelópolis y Vista panorámica de la ciudad. Escudo Otros nombres: El relicario de América/ La ciudad de los Ángeles/ La Angelópolis Lema: Muy noble y muy leal ciudad de Puebla de los Ángeles Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza Localización de Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza en México Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza Localización de Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza en Puebla Mapa interactivo Coordenadas 19°03′05″N 98°13′04″O  /  19.051388888889, -98.217777777778 Coordenadas: 19°03′05″N 98°13′04″O  /  19.051388888889, -98.217777777778 Idioma oficial Español Entidad Localidad  • País   México  • Estado Puebla  • Municipio Puebla Presidente municipal Claudia Rivera Vivanc
                    Read more

                    Musa

                    Image
                    Para el género de plantas, véase Musa (planta). Apolo y la Nueve Musas En la mitología griega, las musas (en griego antiguo μοῦσαι « mousai» ) son, según los escritores más antiguos, las divinidades inspiradoras de las Artes: cada una de ellas está relacionada con ramas artísticas y del conocimiento. Son hijas de Zeus y de Mnemósine, compañeras del séquito de Apolo, dios olímpico de la música y patrón de las bellas artes, quien tuvo romances con cada una de ellas, dejando descendientes. Bajaban a la tierra a susurrar ideas e inspirar a aquellos mortales que las invocaran. En la época más arcaica eran las ninfas inspiradoras de las fuentes, en las cuales eran adoradas. Finalmente, alrededor de los siglos VIII-VII a. C. [ 1 ] ​ prevaleció en todo el territorio de la Hélade la adoración de las nueve Musas, que son Calíope, Clío, Erato, Euterpe, Melpómene, Polimnia, Talía, Terpsícore y Urania. El culto a las musas era originalmente de Tracia y Beocia, y fueron de vital impo
                    Read more