Common notations

In this section:

  • we always assume that and ;
  • If , then we say is intermediate extension;
  • for a field homomorphism: , it always have and , that is, is injective.

Definition

We say a field homomorphism is a -homomorphism if it is also a homomorphism of -vector spaces.

In fact, is a -homomorphism iff .

\begin{proof} Note that and . \end{proof}

Definition

Denote .

Remark. is a group; if , then by injective and finite.

Lemma

For any and , if , then .

\begin{proof} Easy. \end{proof}

Remark. This lemma tells us acts on .

Examples.

  • .
  • .
  • and so , then we have . See here.

Lemma

Let , and let . Let , then is an intermediate extension.

Let , and let . Then is a subgroup.

Example. Consider the field extension and the corresponding Galois group , where , , and .

  • There are subgroups.
    • When , .
    • When , .
    • When , .
    • When , .
    • When , .
  • Conversely, there are intermediate fields.
    • When , .
    • When , .
    • When , .
    • When ,
    • When , .

Remark. There seems to be a nice correspondence between subgroups and subfields. However, how many intermediate fields exactly are there? By theorem of primitive element, there exists such that for any intermediate field. Recall an exercise in HW, it is easy to prove that there are intermediate fields exactly.

Another examples.

  • has subgroups but has more than intermediate extensions.
  • , but has intermediate extensions.

Definition

Let . If , then say is a Galois extension of . For short, we say is a Galois extension or say is Galois over . In this case, write and call it the Galois group of the Galois extension.

fundamental theorem of Galois theory: the finite case

Suppose is a finite Galois extension. Then there is a bijection between

given by , . Furthermore,

  • If , then and .
  • For any , is also Galois and is Galois iff is a normal subgroup. In this case, .

\begin{proof} See 3.5 Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Galois Theory. \end{proof}

Remark. Galois extension is not transitive, that is, it is possible that and are Galois, but is not Galois. The reason is normality is not transitive, see here.