Prove that $sqrt{3pmsqrt{7}} notin mathbb{Q}(sqrt{3mpsqrt{7}})$.












5












$begingroup$


I'm currently solving a fairly long exercise related to Galois theory in which I've come across having to prove that $sqrt{3+sqrt{7}} notin mathbb{Q}(sqrt{3-sqrt{7}})$ and $sqrt{3-sqrt{7}} notin mathbb{Q}(sqrt{3+sqrt{7}})$. So far I haven't been able to find an "easy" or simple and understandable way to do so given that this isn't the main part of the problem.



Any help is appreciated!






abstract-algebra galois-theory algebraic-number-theory







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    $sqrt{3+sqrt{7}} = a+bsqrt{3-sqrt{7}} implies 3+sqrt{7} = a^2+2absqrt{3-sqrt{7}} + b(3-sqrt{7})$ $ implies c+dsqrt{7} = esqrt{3-sqrt{7}} implies c^2+2cdsqrt{7}+7d^2 = e^2(3-sqrt{7}) implies 2cd = -e^2$. But $-e^2 = -4a^2b^2$ and $2cd = 2(3-a^2-3b)(b+1)$, so we must have $2a^2b^2 = (a^2+3b-3)(b+1)$. Now solve for $a^2$ and hopefully this will give a contradiction.
    $endgroup$
    – mathworker21
    Jan 8 at 15:39






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    @mathworker21 What is $a$ and $b$? ${1,sqrt{3-sqrt{7}}}$ is not a basis for $mathbb{Q}(sqrt{3-sqrt{7}})$ over $mathbb{Q}$
    $endgroup$
    – mouthetics
    Jan 8 at 15:40










  • $begingroup$
    @mouthetics good point. imma bit rusty on my algebra. (they were supposed to be rationals)
    $endgroup$
    – mathworker21
    Jan 8 at 15:41
















5












$begingroup$


I'm currently solving a fairly long exercise related to Galois theory in which I've come across having to prove that $sqrt{3+sqrt{7}} notin mathbb{Q}(sqrt{3-sqrt{7}})$ and $sqrt{3-sqrt{7}} notin mathbb{Q}(sqrt{3+sqrt{7}})$. So far I haven't been able to find an "easy" or simple and understandable way to do so given that this isn't the main part of the problem.



Any help is appreciated!






abstract-algebra galois-theory algebraic-number-theory







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    $sqrt{3+sqrt{7}} = a+bsqrt{3-sqrt{7}} implies 3+sqrt{7} = a^2+2absqrt{3-sqrt{7}} + b(3-sqrt{7})$ $ implies c+dsqrt{7} = esqrt{3-sqrt{7}} implies c^2+2cdsqrt{7}+7d^2 = e^2(3-sqrt{7}) implies 2cd = -e^2$. But $-e^2 = -4a^2b^2$ and $2cd = 2(3-a^2-3b)(b+1)$, so we must have $2a^2b^2 = (a^2+3b-3)(b+1)$. Now solve for $a^2$ and hopefully this will give a contradiction.
    $endgroup$
    – mathworker21
    Jan 8 at 15:39






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    @mathworker21 What is $a$ and $b$? ${1,sqrt{3-sqrt{7}}}$ is not a basis for $mathbb{Q}(sqrt{3-sqrt{7}})$ over $mathbb{Q}$
    $endgroup$
    – mouthetics
    Jan 8 at 15:40










  • $begingroup$
    @mouthetics good point. imma bit rusty on my algebra. (they were supposed to be rationals)
    $endgroup$
    – mathworker21
    Jan 8 at 15:41














5












5








5





$begingroup$


I'm currently solving a fairly long exercise related to Galois theory in which I've come across having to prove that $sqrt{3+sqrt{7}} notin mathbb{Q}(sqrt{3-sqrt{7}})$ and $sqrt{3-sqrt{7}} notin mathbb{Q}(sqrt{3+sqrt{7}})$. So far I haven't been able to find an "easy" or simple and understandable way to do so given that this isn't the main part of the problem.



Any help is appreciated!






abstract-algebra galois-theory algebraic-number-theory







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




I'm currently solving a fairly long exercise related to Galois theory in which I've come across having to prove that $sqrt{3+sqrt{7}} notin mathbb{Q}(sqrt{3-sqrt{7}})$ and $sqrt{3-sqrt{7}} notin mathbb{Q}(sqrt{3+sqrt{7}})$. So far I haven't been able to find an "easy" or simple and understandable way to do so given that this isn't the main part of the problem.



Any help is appreciated!






abstract-algebra galois-theory algebraic-number-theory




abstract-algebra galois-theory algebraic-number-theory






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Jan 8 at 15:59









Servaes

22.6k33793




22.6k33793










asked Jan 8 at 15:32









BBC3BBC3

368213




368213












  • $begingroup$
    $sqrt{3+sqrt{7}} = a+bsqrt{3-sqrt{7}} implies 3+sqrt{7} = a^2+2absqrt{3-sqrt{7}} + b(3-sqrt{7})$ $ implies c+dsqrt{7} = esqrt{3-sqrt{7}} implies c^2+2cdsqrt{7}+7d^2 = e^2(3-sqrt{7}) implies 2cd = -e^2$. But $-e^2 = -4a^2b^2$ and $2cd = 2(3-a^2-3b)(b+1)$, so we must have $2a^2b^2 = (a^2+3b-3)(b+1)$. Now solve for $a^2$ and hopefully this will give a contradiction.
    $endgroup$
    – mathworker21
    Jan 8 at 15:39






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    @mathworker21 What is $a$ and $b$? ${1,sqrt{3-sqrt{7}}}$ is not a basis for $mathbb{Q}(sqrt{3-sqrt{7}})$ over $mathbb{Q}$
    $endgroup$
    – mouthetics
    Jan 8 at 15:40










  • $begingroup$
    @mouthetics good point. imma bit rusty on my algebra. (they were supposed to be rationals)
    $endgroup$
    – mathworker21
    Jan 8 at 15:41


















  • $begingroup$
    $sqrt{3+sqrt{7}} = a+bsqrt{3-sqrt{7}} implies 3+sqrt{7} = a^2+2absqrt{3-sqrt{7}} + b(3-sqrt{7})$ $ implies c+dsqrt{7} = esqrt{3-sqrt{7}} implies c^2+2cdsqrt{7}+7d^2 = e^2(3-sqrt{7}) implies 2cd = -e^2$. But $-e^2 = -4a^2b^2$ and $2cd = 2(3-a^2-3b)(b+1)$, so we must have $2a^2b^2 = (a^2+3b-3)(b+1)$. Now solve for $a^2$ and hopefully this will give a contradiction.
    $endgroup$
    – mathworker21
    Jan 8 at 15:39






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    @mathworker21 What is $a$ and $b$? ${1,sqrt{3-sqrt{7}}}$ is not a basis for $mathbb{Q}(sqrt{3-sqrt{7}})$ over $mathbb{Q}$
    $endgroup$
    – mouthetics
    Jan 8 at 15:40










  • $begingroup$
    @mouthetics good point. imma bit rusty on my algebra. (they were supposed to be rationals)
    $endgroup$
    – mathworker21
    Jan 8 at 15:41
















$begingroup$
$sqrt{3+sqrt{7}} = a+bsqrt{3-sqrt{7}} implies 3+sqrt{7} = a^2+2absqrt{3-sqrt{7}} + b(3-sqrt{7})$ $ implies c+dsqrt{7} = esqrt{3-sqrt{7}} implies c^2+2cdsqrt{7}+7d^2 = e^2(3-sqrt{7}) implies 2cd = -e^2$. But $-e^2 = -4a^2b^2$ and $2cd = 2(3-a^2-3b)(b+1)$, so we must have $2a^2b^2 = (a^2+3b-3)(b+1)$. Now solve for $a^2$ and hopefully this will give a contradiction.
$endgroup$
– mathworker21
Jan 8 at 15:39




$begingroup$
$sqrt{3+sqrt{7}} = a+bsqrt{3-sqrt{7}} implies 3+sqrt{7} = a^2+2absqrt{3-sqrt{7}} + b(3-sqrt{7})$ $ implies c+dsqrt{7} = esqrt{3-sqrt{7}} implies c^2+2cdsqrt{7}+7d^2 = e^2(3-sqrt{7}) implies 2cd = -e^2$. But $-e^2 = -4a^2b^2$ and $2cd = 2(3-a^2-3b)(b+1)$, so we must have $2a^2b^2 = (a^2+3b-3)(b+1)$. Now solve for $a^2$ and hopefully this will give a contradiction.
$endgroup$
– mathworker21
Jan 8 at 15:39




3




3




$begingroup$
@mathworker21 What is $a$ and $b$? ${1,sqrt{3-sqrt{7}}}$ is not a basis for $mathbb{Q}(sqrt{3-sqrt{7}})$ over $mathbb{Q}$
$endgroup$
– mouthetics
Jan 8 at 15:40




$begingroup$
@mathworker21 What is $a$ and $b$? ${1,sqrt{3-sqrt{7}}}$ is not a basis for $mathbb{Q}(sqrt{3-sqrt{7}})$ over $mathbb{Q}$
$endgroup$
– mouthetics
Jan 8 at 15:40












$begingroup$
@mouthetics good point. imma bit rusty on my algebra. (they were supposed to be rationals)
$endgroup$
– mathworker21
Jan 8 at 15:41




$begingroup$
@mouthetics good point. imma bit rusty on my algebra. (they were supposed to be rationals)
$endgroup$
– mathworker21
Jan 8 at 15:41










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















7












$begingroup$

Let $x_{pm}=sqrt{3 pm sqrt{7}}$.



It is easy to see that we have the following quadratic extensions:



$mathbb{Q} subset mathbb{Q}(sqrt{7}) subset mathbb{Q}(x_+)$,



$mathbb{Q} subset mathbb{Q}(sqrt{7}) subset mathbb{Q}(x_-)$.



Assume that $x_+ in K=mathbb{Q}(x_-)$. Then $sqrt{2} = x_+x_- in K$, thus $L=mathbb{Q}(sqrt{2},sqrt{7}) subset K$.



Since these fields have the same degree over $mathbb{Q}$, $K subset L$, ie $x_+=a+bsqrt{2}+csqrt{7}+dsqrt{14}$ for rationals $a,b,c,d$.



Taking squares, we get $3+sqrt{7}=(a^2+2b^2+7c^2+14d^2) + (2ab+14cd)sqrt{2} + (2da+2bc)sqrt{14} + (2ca+4bd)sqrt{7}$.



Thus $ab=-7cd$, $ad=-bc$, $2ca+4bd=1$, $a^2+2b^2+7c^2+14d^2=3$.



Assume $a=0$: then $d neq 0$ thus $c=0$ and $bd=1/4$, $2b^2+14d^2=3$. Usual quadratic theory yields then a contradiction.



Thus $b=-7cd/a$, and $ad=7c^2d/a$ thus $a^2=7c^2$ hence $a=0$. A contradiction, hence the result.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$





















    2












    $begingroup$

    In general, in this kind of problem, it is better not to mix the two operations + and $times$. Let me give an illustration here, using only $times$. Introduce the quadratic field $k=mathbf Q(sqrt 7)$. Adopting the notation $x_{pm}=sqrt {3 pm sqrt 7}$ suggested by @Mindlack, let us write $K_{pm}=k(x_{pm})$. These are two extensions of $k$ of degree at most $2$ :




    • if $K_{+}$ or $K_{-} =k$, i.e. $(3 pmsqrt 7)in {k^*}^2$, norming down to $mathbf Q$ shows that $N(3pmsqrt 7)=2$ is a square in $mathbf Q^*$: impossible


    • if both degrees are 2, $K_{pm}subset K_{mp}$ iff $K_{pm}= K_{mp}$, iff $k(x_{+})= k(x_{-})$, iff $2=(3+sqrt 7)(3-sqrt 7)in {k^*}^2$ (no specific calculation, this is rudimentary Kummer theory over $k$), iff $mathbf Q(sqrt 2)=mathbf Q(sqrt 7)$, iff $2.7$ is a square in $mathbf Q^*$(again by Kummer): impossible because $mathbf Z$ is a UFD ./.







    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$





















      2












      $begingroup$

      HINT: Show that both have minimal polynomial $f:=X^4-6X^2+2$ over $Bbb{Q}$, and hence that $[Bbb{Q}(sqrt{3pmsqrt{7}}):Bbb{Q}]=4$, but that the splitting field of $f$ over $Bbb{Q}$ has degree greater than $4$.






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$













      • $begingroup$
        My goal is to justify that the splitting field is $mathbb{Q}(sqrt{3+sqrt{7}},sqrt{3-sqrt{7}})$, can I see that its degree is grater than 4 without having to prove what I was asking?
        $endgroup$
        – BBC3
        Jan 8 at 16:27










      • $begingroup$
        How to prove that the splitting field of $f$ over $mathbb{Q}$ has degree greater than $4$? Any other method?
        $endgroup$
        – mouthetics
        Jan 8 at 16:28










      • $begingroup$
        Do you mean $X^4 - 6X^2 + 2$?
        $endgroup$
        – Connor Harris
        Jan 8 at 17:08










      • $begingroup$
        @ConnorHarris Indeed I do, edited.
        $endgroup$
        – Servaes
        Jan 8 at 22:46






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @mouthetics As the question is tagged Galois theory, determining the order of the Galois group was the approach I had in mind.
        $endgroup$
        – Servaes
        Jan 8 at 22:48











      Your Answer





      StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
      return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
      StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
      StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
      });
      });
      }, "mathjax-editing");

      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%2f3066313%2fprove-that-sqrt3-pm-sqrt7-not-in-mathbbq-sqrt3-mp-sqrt7%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes








      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      7












      $begingroup$

      Let $x_{pm}=sqrt{3 pm sqrt{7}}$.



      It is easy to see that we have the following quadratic extensions:



      $mathbb{Q} subset mathbb{Q}(sqrt{7}) subset mathbb{Q}(x_+)$,



      $mathbb{Q} subset mathbb{Q}(sqrt{7}) subset mathbb{Q}(x_-)$.



      Assume that $x_+ in K=mathbb{Q}(x_-)$. Then $sqrt{2} = x_+x_- in K$, thus $L=mathbb{Q}(sqrt{2},sqrt{7}) subset K$.



      Since these fields have the same degree over $mathbb{Q}$, $K subset L$, ie $x_+=a+bsqrt{2}+csqrt{7}+dsqrt{14}$ for rationals $a,b,c,d$.



      Taking squares, we get $3+sqrt{7}=(a^2+2b^2+7c^2+14d^2) + (2ab+14cd)sqrt{2} + (2da+2bc)sqrt{14} + (2ca+4bd)sqrt{7}$.



      Thus $ab=-7cd$, $ad=-bc$, $2ca+4bd=1$, $a^2+2b^2+7c^2+14d^2=3$.



      Assume $a=0$: then $d neq 0$ thus $c=0$ and $bd=1/4$, $2b^2+14d^2=3$. Usual quadratic theory yields then a contradiction.



      Thus $b=-7cd/a$, and $ad=7c^2d/a$ thus $a^2=7c^2$ hence $a=0$. A contradiction, hence the result.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$


















        7












        $begingroup$

        Let $x_{pm}=sqrt{3 pm sqrt{7}}$.



        It is easy to see that we have the following quadratic extensions:



        $mathbb{Q} subset mathbb{Q}(sqrt{7}) subset mathbb{Q}(x_+)$,



        $mathbb{Q} subset mathbb{Q}(sqrt{7}) subset mathbb{Q}(x_-)$.



        Assume that $x_+ in K=mathbb{Q}(x_-)$. Then $sqrt{2} = x_+x_- in K$, thus $L=mathbb{Q}(sqrt{2},sqrt{7}) subset K$.



        Since these fields have the same degree over $mathbb{Q}$, $K subset L$, ie $x_+=a+bsqrt{2}+csqrt{7}+dsqrt{14}$ for rationals $a,b,c,d$.



        Taking squares, we get $3+sqrt{7}=(a^2+2b^2+7c^2+14d^2) + (2ab+14cd)sqrt{2} + (2da+2bc)sqrt{14} + (2ca+4bd)sqrt{7}$.



        Thus $ab=-7cd$, $ad=-bc$, $2ca+4bd=1$, $a^2+2b^2+7c^2+14d^2=3$.



        Assume $a=0$: then $d neq 0$ thus $c=0$ and $bd=1/4$, $2b^2+14d^2=3$. Usual quadratic theory yields then a contradiction.



        Thus $b=-7cd/a$, and $ad=7c^2d/a$ thus $a^2=7c^2$ hence $a=0$. A contradiction, hence the result.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$
















          7












          7








          7





          $begingroup$

          Let $x_{pm}=sqrt{3 pm sqrt{7}}$.



          It is easy to see that we have the following quadratic extensions:



          $mathbb{Q} subset mathbb{Q}(sqrt{7}) subset mathbb{Q}(x_+)$,



          $mathbb{Q} subset mathbb{Q}(sqrt{7}) subset mathbb{Q}(x_-)$.



          Assume that $x_+ in K=mathbb{Q}(x_-)$. Then $sqrt{2} = x_+x_- in K$, thus $L=mathbb{Q}(sqrt{2},sqrt{7}) subset K$.



          Since these fields have the same degree over $mathbb{Q}$, $K subset L$, ie $x_+=a+bsqrt{2}+csqrt{7}+dsqrt{14}$ for rationals $a,b,c,d$.



          Taking squares, we get $3+sqrt{7}=(a^2+2b^2+7c^2+14d^2) + (2ab+14cd)sqrt{2} + (2da+2bc)sqrt{14} + (2ca+4bd)sqrt{7}$.



          Thus $ab=-7cd$, $ad=-bc$, $2ca+4bd=1$, $a^2+2b^2+7c^2+14d^2=3$.



          Assume $a=0$: then $d neq 0$ thus $c=0$ and $bd=1/4$, $2b^2+14d^2=3$. Usual quadratic theory yields then a contradiction.



          Thus $b=-7cd/a$, and $ad=7c^2d/a$ thus $a^2=7c^2$ hence $a=0$. A contradiction, hence the result.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          Let $x_{pm}=sqrt{3 pm sqrt{7}}$.



          It is easy to see that we have the following quadratic extensions:



          $mathbb{Q} subset mathbb{Q}(sqrt{7}) subset mathbb{Q}(x_+)$,



          $mathbb{Q} subset mathbb{Q}(sqrt{7}) subset mathbb{Q}(x_-)$.



          Assume that $x_+ in K=mathbb{Q}(x_-)$. Then $sqrt{2} = x_+x_- in K$, thus $L=mathbb{Q}(sqrt{2},sqrt{7}) subset K$.



          Since these fields have the same degree over $mathbb{Q}$, $K subset L$, ie $x_+=a+bsqrt{2}+csqrt{7}+dsqrt{14}$ for rationals $a,b,c,d$.



          Taking squares, we get $3+sqrt{7}=(a^2+2b^2+7c^2+14d^2) + (2ab+14cd)sqrt{2} + (2da+2bc)sqrt{14} + (2ca+4bd)sqrt{7}$.



          Thus $ab=-7cd$, $ad=-bc$, $2ca+4bd=1$, $a^2+2b^2+7c^2+14d^2=3$.



          Assume $a=0$: then $d neq 0$ thus $c=0$ and $bd=1/4$, $2b^2+14d^2=3$. Usual quadratic theory yields then a contradiction.



          Thus $b=-7cd/a$, and $ad=7c^2d/a$ thus $a^2=7c^2$ hence $a=0$. A contradiction, hence the result.







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered Jan 8 at 16:06









          MindlackMindlack

          2,78717




          2,78717























              2












              $begingroup$

              In general, in this kind of problem, it is better not to mix the two operations + and $times$. Let me give an illustration here, using only $times$. Introduce the quadratic field $k=mathbf Q(sqrt 7)$. Adopting the notation $x_{pm}=sqrt {3 pm sqrt 7}$ suggested by @Mindlack, let us write $K_{pm}=k(x_{pm})$. These are two extensions of $k$ of degree at most $2$ :




              • if $K_{+}$ or $K_{-} =k$, i.e. $(3 pmsqrt 7)in {k^*}^2$, norming down to $mathbf Q$ shows that $N(3pmsqrt 7)=2$ is a square in $mathbf Q^*$: impossible


              • if both degrees are 2, $K_{pm}subset K_{mp}$ iff $K_{pm}= K_{mp}$, iff $k(x_{+})= k(x_{-})$, iff $2=(3+sqrt 7)(3-sqrt 7)in {k^*}^2$ (no specific calculation, this is rudimentary Kummer theory over $k$), iff $mathbf Q(sqrt 2)=mathbf Q(sqrt 7)$, iff $2.7$ is a square in $mathbf Q^*$(again by Kummer): impossible because $mathbf Z$ is a UFD ./.







              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$


















                2












                $begingroup$

                In general, in this kind of problem, it is better not to mix the two operations + and $times$. Let me give an illustration here, using only $times$. Introduce the quadratic field $k=mathbf Q(sqrt 7)$. Adopting the notation $x_{pm}=sqrt {3 pm sqrt 7}$ suggested by @Mindlack, let us write $K_{pm}=k(x_{pm})$. These are two extensions of $k$ of degree at most $2$ :




                • if $K_{+}$ or $K_{-} =k$, i.e. $(3 pmsqrt 7)in {k^*}^2$, norming down to $mathbf Q$ shows that $N(3pmsqrt 7)=2$ is a square in $mathbf Q^*$: impossible


                • if both degrees are 2, $K_{pm}subset K_{mp}$ iff $K_{pm}= K_{mp}$, iff $k(x_{+})= k(x_{-})$, iff $2=(3+sqrt 7)(3-sqrt 7)in {k^*}^2$ (no specific calculation, this is rudimentary Kummer theory over $k$), iff $mathbf Q(sqrt 2)=mathbf Q(sqrt 7)$, iff $2.7$ is a square in $mathbf Q^*$(again by Kummer): impossible because $mathbf Z$ is a UFD ./.







                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$
















                  2












                  2








                  2





                  $begingroup$

                  In general, in this kind of problem, it is better not to mix the two operations + and $times$. Let me give an illustration here, using only $times$. Introduce the quadratic field $k=mathbf Q(sqrt 7)$. Adopting the notation $x_{pm}=sqrt {3 pm sqrt 7}$ suggested by @Mindlack, let us write $K_{pm}=k(x_{pm})$. These are two extensions of $k$ of degree at most $2$ :




                  • if $K_{+}$ or $K_{-} =k$, i.e. $(3 pmsqrt 7)in {k^*}^2$, norming down to $mathbf Q$ shows that $N(3pmsqrt 7)=2$ is a square in $mathbf Q^*$: impossible


                  • if both degrees are 2, $K_{pm}subset K_{mp}$ iff $K_{pm}= K_{mp}$, iff $k(x_{+})= k(x_{-})$, iff $2=(3+sqrt 7)(3-sqrt 7)in {k^*}^2$ (no specific calculation, this is rudimentary Kummer theory over $k$), iff $mathbf Q(sqrt 2)=mathbf Q(sqrt 7)$, iff $2.7$ is a square in $mathbf Q^*$(again by Kummer): impossible because $mathbf Z$ is a UFD ./.







                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  In general, in this kind of problem, it is better not to mix the two operations + and $times$. Let me give an illustration here, using only $times$. Introduce the quadratic field $k=mathbf Q(sqrt 7)$. Adopting the notation $x_{pm}=sqrt {3 pm sqrt 7}$ suggested by @Mindlack, let us write $K_{pm}=k(x_{pm})$. These are two extensions of $k$ of degree at most $2$ :




                  • if $K_{+}$ or $K_{-} =k$, i.e. $(3 pmsqrt 7)in {k^*}^2$, norming down to $mathbf Q$ shows that $N(3pmsqrt 7)=2$ is a square in $mathbf Q^*$: impossible


                  • if both degrees are 2, $K_{pm}subset K_{mp}$ iff $K_{pm}= K_{mp}$, iff $k(x_{+})= k(x_{-})$, iff $2=(3+sqrt 7)(3-sqrt 7)in {k^*}^2$ (no specific calculation, this is rudimentary Kummer theory over $k$), iff $mathbf Q(sqrt 2)=mathbf Q(sqrt 7)$, iff $2.7$ is a square in $mathbf Q^*$(again by Kummer): impossible because $mathbf Z$ is a UFD ./.








                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Jan 8 at 20:32









                  nguyen quang donguyen quang do

                  8,4791723




                  8,4791723























                      2












                      $begingroup$

                      HINT: Show that both have minimal polynomial $f:=X^4-6X^2+2$ over $Bbb{Q}$, and hence that $[Bbb{Q}(sqrt{3pmsqrt{7}}):Bbb{Q}]=4$, but that the splitting field of $f$ over $Bbb{Q}$ has degree greater than $4$.






                      share|cite|improve this answer











                      $endgroup$













                      • $begingroup$
                        My goal is to justify that the splitting field is $mathbb{Q}(sqrt{3+sqrt{7}},sqrt{3-sqrt{7}})$, can I see that its degree is grater than 4 without having to prove what I was asking?
                        $endgroup$
                        – BBC3
                        Jan 8 at 16:27










                      • $begingroup$
                        How to prove that the splitting field of $f$ over $mathbb{Q}$ has degree greater than $4$? Any other method?
                        $endgroup$
                        – mouthetics
                        Jan 8 at 16:28










                      • $begingroup$
                        Do you mean $X^4 - 6X^2 + 2$?
                        $endgroup$
                        – Connor Harris
                        Jan 8 at 17:08










                      • $begingroup$
                        @ConnorHarris Indeed I do, edited.
                        $endgroup$
                        – Servaes
                        Jan 8 at 22:46






                      • 1




                        $begingroup$
                        @mouthetics As the question is tagged Galois theory, determining the order of the Galois group was the approach I had in mind.
                        $endgroup$
                        – Servaes
                        Jan 8 at 22:48
















                      2












                      $begingroup$

                      HINT: Show that both have minimal polynomial $f:=X^4-6X^2+2$ over $Bbb{Q}$, and hence that $[Bbb{Q}(sqrt{3pmsqrt{7}}):Bbb{Q}]=4$, but that the splitting field of $f$ over $Bbb{Q}$ has degree greater than $4$.






                      share|cite|improve this answer











                      $endgroup$













                      • $begingroup$
                        My goal is to justify that the splitting field is $mathbb{Q}(sqrt{3+sqrt{7}},sqrt{3-sqrt{7}})$, can I see that its degree is grater than 4 without having to prove what I was asking?
                        $endgroup$
                        – BBC3
                        Jan 8 at 16:27










                      • $begingroup$
                        How to prove that the splitting field of $f$ over $mathbb{Q}$ has degree greater than $4$? Any other method?
                        $endgroup$
                        – mouthetics
                        Jan 8 at 16:28










                      • $begingroup$
                        Do you mean $X^4 - 6X^2 + 2$?
                        $endgroup$
                        – Connor Harris
                        Jan 8 at 17:08










                      • $begingroup$
                        @ConnorHarris Indeed I do, edited.
                        $endgroup$
                        – Servaes
                        Jan 8 at 22:46






                      • 1




                        $begingroup$
                        @mouthetics As the question is tagged Galois theory, determining the order of the Galois group was the approach I had in mind.
                        $endgroup$
                        – Servaes
                        Jan 8 at 22:48














                      2












                      2








                      2





                      $begingroup$

                      HINT: Show that both have minimal polynomial $f:=X^4-6X^2+2$ over $Bbb{Q}$, and hence that $[Bbb{Q}(sqrt{3pmsqrt{7}}):Bbb{Q}]=4$, but that the splitting field of $f$ over $Bbb{Q}$ has degree greater than $4$.






                      share|cite|improve this answer











                      $endgroup$



                      HINT: Show that both have minimal polynomial $f:=X^4-6X^2+2$ over $Bbb{Q}$, and hence that $[Bbb{Q}(sqrt{3pmsqrt{7}}):Bbb{Q}]=4$, but that the splitting field of $f$ over $Bbb{Q}$ has degree greater than $4$.







                      share|cite|improve this answer














                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer








                      edited Jan 8 at 22:46

























                      answered Jan 8 at 15:48









                      ServaesServaes

                      22.6k33793




                      22.6k33793












                      • $begingroup$
                        My goal is to justify that the splitting field is $mathbb{Q}(sqrt{3+sqrt{7}},sqrt{3-sqrt{7}})$, can I see that its degree is grater than 4 without having to prove what I was asking?
                        $endgroup$
                        – BBC3
                        Jan 8 at 16:27










                      • $begingroup$
                        How to prove that the splitting field of $f$ over $mathbb{Q}$ has degree greater than $4$? Any other method?
                        $endgroup$
                        – mouthetics
                        Jan 8 at 16:28










                      • $begingroup$
                        Do you mean $X^4 - 6X^2 + 2$?
                        $endgroup$
                        – Connor Harris
                        Jan 8 at 17:08










                      • $begingroup$
                        @ConnorHarris Indeed I do, edited.
                        $endgroup$
                        – Servaes
                        Jan 8 at 22:46






                      • 1




                        $begingroup$
                        @mouthetics As the question is tagged Galois theory, determining the order of the Galois group was the approach I had in mind.
                        $endgroup$
                        – Servaes
                        Jan 8 at 22:48


















                      • $begingroup$
                        My goal is to justify that the splitting field is $mathbb{Q}(sqrt{3+sqrt{7}},sqrt{3-sqrt{7}})$, can I see that its degree is grater than 4 without having to prove what I was asking?
                        $endgroup$
                        – BBC3
                        Jan 8 at 16:27










                      • $begingroup$
                        How to prove that the splitting field of $f$ over $mathbb{Q}$ has degree greater than $4$? Any other method?
                        $endgroup$
                        – mouthetics
                        Jan 8 at 16:28










                      • $begingroup$
                        Do you mean $X^4 - 6X^2 + 2$?
                        $endgroup$
                        – Connor Harris
                        Jan 8 at 17:08










                      • $begingroup$
                        @ConnorHarris Indeed I do, edited.
                        $endgroup$
                        – Servaes
                        Jan 8 at 22:46






                      • 1




                        $begingroup$
                        @mouthetics As the question is tagged Galois theory, determining the order of the Galois group was the approach I had in mind.
                        $endgroup$
                        – Servaes
                        Jan 8 at 22:48
















                      $begingroup$
                      My goal is to justify that the splitting field is $mathbb{Q}(sqrt{3+sqrt{7}},sqrt{3-sqrt{7}})$, can I see that its degree is grater than 4 without having to prove what I was asking?
                      $endgroup$
                      – BBC3
                      Jan 8 at 16:27




                      $begingroup$
                      My goal is to justify that the splitting field is $mathbb{Q}(sqrt{3+sqrt{7}},sqrt{3-sqrt{7}})$, can I see that its degree is grater than 4 without having to prove what I was asking?
                      $endgroup$
                      – BBC3
                      Jan 8 at 16:27












                      $begingroup$
                      How to prove that the splitting field of $f$ over $mathbb{Q}$ has degree greater than $4$? Any other method?
                      $endgroup$
                      – mouthetics
                      Jan 8 at 16:28




                      $begingroup$
                      How to prove that the splitting field of $f$ over $mathbb{Q}$ has degree greater than $4$? Any other method?
                      $endgroup$
                      – mouthetics
                      Jan 8 at 16:28












                      $begingroup$
                      Do you mean $X^4 - 6X^2 + 2$?
                      $endgroup$
                      – Connor Harris
                      Jan 8 at 17:08




                      $begingroup$
                      Do you mean $X^4 - 6X^2 + 2$?
                      $endgroup$
                      – Connor Harris
                      Jan 8 at 17:08












                      $begingroup$
                      @ConnorHarris Indeed I do, edited.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Servaes
                      Jan 8 at 22:46




                      $begingroup$
                      @ConnorHarris Indeed I do, edited.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Servaes
                      Jan 8 at 22:46




                      1




                      1




                      $begingroup$
                      @mouthetics As the question is tagged Galois theory, determining the order of the Galois group was the approach I had in mind.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Servaes
                      Jan 8 at 22:48




                      $begingroup$
                      @mouthetics As the question is tagged Galois theory, determining the order of the Galois group was the approach I had in mind.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Servaes
                      Jan 8 at 22:48


















                      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%2f3066313%2fprove-that-sqrt3-pm-sqrt7-not-in-mathbbq-sqrt3-mp-sqrt7%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

                      Mario Kart Wii

                      Image
                      Please consider supporting The Cutting Room Floor on Patreon. Thanks for all your support! Mario Kart Wii From The Cutting Room Floor Jump to: navigation, search Mario Kart Wii Developer : Nintendo Publisher : Nintendo Platform : Wii Released in JP : April 10, 2008 Released in US : April 27, 2008 Released in EU : April 11, 2008 Released in AU : April 24, 2008 Released in KR : April 30, 2009 This game has unused animations. This game has unused areas. This game has unused code. This game has unused objects. This game has unused modes / minigames. This game has unused graphics. This game has unused models. This game has unused items. This game has unused music. This game has regional differences. This game has a notes page This game has a prerelease article Mario Kart Wii is the sixth game in the series (not counting Arcade editions), which intro...
                      Read more

                      The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth/Afterbirth

                      Image
                      Please consider supporting The Cutting Room Floor on Patreon. Thanks for all your support! The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth/Afterbirth From The Cutting Room Floor < The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth Jump to: navigation, search This is a sub-page of The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth . Afterbirth is the first expansion pack for Rebirth and features a variety of improvements. Contents 1 Unused Graphics 1.1 Old Man Keeper 1.2 Skinless Hush 1.3 Miscellaneous Unused Hush Sprites 1.4 Generosity achievement 1.5 Afterbirth+ Room Editor 1.6 Bearded Ultra Greed 1.7 Early Ultra Greed 1.8 Unused Brownie Expression 1.9 Frail's Spinning Head 1.10 Mom's Dead Hand Alt 2 Unused Audio 2.1 Unused Dead Womb Layer 2.2 Unused Hush Battle Outro 2.3 The Stain Grunt Unused Graphics Old Man Keeper Image file: gfxuimain me...
                      Read more

                      What does “Dominus providebit” mean?

                      Image
                      5 Does "Dominus providebit" mean "The Lord will provide" or "The Lord provides"? I once had a bit of an argument with a guy who studied Latin over that. It's an inscription that appears on the rim of some old Swiss coins that I have. meaning latin-to-english-translation grammar-identification share | improve this question edited Jan 18 at 15:27 V2Blast 105 4 asked Jan 17 at 22:49 Donald K. Donald K. 26 1 ...
                      Read more