§ Separable extensions via derivation
- Let R be a commutative ring, M an R-module. A derivation is a map such that D(a+b)=D(a)+D(b) and D(ab)=aD(b)+D(a)b [ie, the calculus chain rule is obeyed ].
- Note that the map does not need to be an R-homomorphism (?!)
- The elements of R such that D(R)=0 are said to be the constants of R.
- The set of constants under X-differentiation for K[X] in char. 0 is K, and K[Xp] in char. p
- Let R be an integral domain with field of fractions K. Any derivation D:R→K uniquely extends to D′:K→K given by the quotient rule: D′(a/b)=(bD(a)−aD(b))/b2.
- Any derivation D:R→R extends to a derivation (.)D:R[x]→R[x]. For a f=∑iaixi∈R[x], the derivation is given by fD(x)≡∑iD(ai)Xi. This applies D to f(x) coefficientwise.
- For a derivation D:R→R with ring of constants C, the associated derivation (.)D:R[x]→R[x] has ring of constants C[x].
- Key thm: Let L/K be a field extension and let D:K→K be a derivation. D extends uniquely to DL iff L is separable over K.
§ If α separable, then derivation over K lifts uniquely to K(α)
- Let D:K→K be a derivation.
- Let α∈L be separable over K with minimal polynomial π(X)∈K[X].
- So, π(X) is irreducible in K[X], π(α)=0, and π′(α)=0.
- Then D has a unique extension D′:K(α)→K(α) given by:
\begin{aligned}
D'(f(\alpha)) \equiv f^D(\alpha) - f'(\alpha) \frac{\pi^D(\alpha)}{pi'(\alpha)}
\end{aligned}
- To prove this, we start by assuming D has an extension, and then showing that it must agree with D′. This tells us why it must look this way.
- Then, after doing this, we start with D′ and show that it is well defined and obeys the derivation conditions. This tells us why it's well-defined .
§ Non example: derivation that does not extend in inseparable case
- Consider Fp(u) as the base field, and let L=Fp(u)(α) where α is a root of Xp−u∈Fp(u)[x]. This is inseparable over K.
- The u derivative on Fp(u) [which treats u as a polynomial and differentiates it ] cannot be extended to L.
- Consider the equation αp=u, which holds in L, since α was explicitly a root of Xp−u.
- Applying the u derivative gives us pαp−1D(α)=D(u). The LHS is zero since we are in characteristic p. The RHS is 1 since D is the u derivative, and so D(u)=1. This is a contradiction, and so D does not exist [any mathematical operation must respect equalities ].
§ Part 2.a: Extension by inseparable element α does not have unique lift of derivation for K(α)/K
- Let α∈L be inseparable over K. Then π′(X)=0 where π(X) is the minimal polynomial for α∈L.
- In particular, π′(α)=0. We will use the vanishing of π′(α) to build a nonzero derivation on K(α) which extends the zero derivation on K.
- Thus, the zero derivation on K has two lifts to K(α): one as the zero derivation on K(α), and one as our non-vanishing lift.
- Define Z:K(α)→K(α) given by Z(f(α))=f′(α) where f(x)∈K[x]. By doing this, we are conflating elements l∈K(α)with elements of the form ∑ikiαi=f(α). We need to check that this is well defined, that if f(α)=g(α), then Z(f(α))=Z(g(α)).
- So start with f(α)=g(α). This implies that f(x)≡g(x) modulo π(x).
- So we write f(x)=g(x)+k(x)π(x).
- Differentiating both sides wrt x, we get f′(x)=g′(x)+k′(x)π(x)+k(x)π′(x).
- Since π(α)=π′(α)=0, we get that f′(α)=g′(α)+0 by evaluating previous equation at α.
- This shows that Z:K(α)→K(α) is well defined.
- See that the derivation Z kills K since K=Kα0. But we see that Z(α)=1, so Z extends the zero derivation on K while not being zero itself.
- We needed separability for the derivation to be well-defined.
§ Part 2.b: Inseparable extension can be written as extension by inseparable element
- Above, we showed that if we have K(α)/K where α inseparable, then derivations cannot be uniquely lifted.
- We want to show that if we have L/K inseparable, then derivation cannot be uniquely lifted. But this is not the same!
- L/K inseparable implies that there is some α∈L which is inseparable, NOT that L=K(α)/K is inseparable!
- So we either need to find some element α such that L=K(α) [not always possible ], or find some field F such that L=F(α) and α is inseparable over F.
- Reiterating: Given L/K is inseparable, we want to find some F/K such that L=F(α) where α is inseparable over F.
- TODO!
§ Part 1 + Part 2: Separable iff unique lift
- Let L/K be separable. By primitive element theorem, L=K(α) for some α∈L, α separable over K.
- Any derivation of K can be extended to a derivation of L from results above. Thus, separable implies unique lift.
- Suppose L/K is inseparable. Then we can write L=F(α)/K where α is inseparable over F, and K⊆F⊆L.
- Then by Part 2.a, we use the Z derivation to non-zero derivation on L that is zero on F. Since it is zero on F and K⊆F, it is zero on K.
- This shows that if L/K is inseparable, then there are two ways to lift the zero derivation, violating uniqueness.
§ Lemma: Derivations at intermediate separable extensions
- Let L/K be a finite extension, and let F/K be an intermediate separable extension. So K⊆F⊆L and F/K is separable.
- Then we claim that every derivation D:F→L that sends K to K has values in F. (ie, it's range is only F, not all of L).
- Pick α∈F, so α is separable over K. We know what the unique derivation looks like, and it has range only F.
§ Payoff: An extension L=K(α1,…,αn) is separable over K iff αi are separable
- Recursively lift the derivations up from K0≡K to Ki+1≡Ki(αi). If the lifts all succeed, then we have a separable extension. If the unique lifts fail, then the extension is not separable.
- The lift can only succeed to uniquely lift iff the final extension L is separable.