The Stacks project

9.12 Separable extensions

In characteristic $p$ something funny happens with irreducible polynomials over fields. We explain this in the following lemma.

Lemma 9.12.1. Let $F$ be a field. Let $P \in F[x]$ be an irreducible polynomial over $F$. Let $P' = \text{d}P/\text{d}x$ be the derivative of $P$ with respect to $x$. Then one of the following two cases happens

  1. $P$ and $P'$ are relatively prime, or

  2. $P'$ is the zero polynomial.

The second case can only happen if $F$ has characteristic $p > 0$. In this case $P(x) = Q(x^ q)$ where $q = p^ f$ is a power of $p$ and $Q \in F[x]$ is an irreducible polynomial such that $Q$ and $Q'$ are relatively prime.

Proof. Note that $P'$ has degree $< \deg (P)$. Hence if $P$ and $P'$ are not relatively prime, then $(P, P') = (R)$ where $R$ is a polynomial of degree $< \deg (P)$ contradicting the irreducibility of $P$. This proves we have the dichotomy between (1) and (2).

Assume we are in case (2) and $P = a_ d x^ d + \ldots + a_0$. Then $P' = da_ d x^{d - 1} + \ldots + a_1$. In characteristic $0$ we see that this forces $a_ d, \ldots , a_1 = 0$ which would mean $P$ is constant a contradiction. Thus we conclude that the characteristic $p$ is positive. In this case the condition $P' = 0$ forces $a_ i = 0$ whenever $p$ does not divide $i$. In other words, $P(x) = P_1(x^ p)$ for some nonconstant polynomial $P_1$. Clearly, $P_1$ is irreducible as well. By induction on the degree we see that $P_1(x) = Q(x^ q)$ as in the statement of the lemma, hence $P(x) = Q(x^{pq})$ and the lemma is proved. $\square$

Definition 9.12.2. Let $F$ be a field. Let $K/F$ be an extension of fields.

  1. We say an irreducible polynomial $P$ over $F$ is separable if it is relatively prime to its derivative.

  2. Given $\alpha \in K$ algebraic over $F$ we say $\alpha $ is separable over $F$ if its minimal polynomial is separable over $F$.

  3. If $K$ is an algebraic extension of $F$, we say $K$ is separable1 over $F$ if every element of $K$ is separable over $F$.

By Lemma 9.12.1 in characteristic $0$ every irreducible polynomial is separable, every algebraic element in an extension is separable, and every algebraic extension is separable.

Lemma 9.12.3. Let $K/E/F$ be a tower of algebraic field extensions.

  1. If $\alpha \in K$ is separable over $F$, then $\alpha $ is separable over $E$.

  2. if $K$ is separable over $F$, then $K$ is separable over $E$.

Proof. We will use Lemma 9.12.1 without further mention. Let $P$ be the minimal polynomial of $\alpha $ over $F$. Let $Q$ be the minimal polynomial of $\alpha $ over $E$. Then $Q$ divides $P$ in the polynomial ring $E[x]$, say $P = QR$. Then $P' = Q'R + QR'$. Thus if $Q' = 0$, then $Q$ divides $P$ and $P'$ hence $P' = 0$ by the lemma. This proves (1). Part (2) follows immediately from (1) and the definitions. $\square$

Lemma 9.12.4. Let $F$ be a field. An irreducible polynomial $P$ over $F$ is separable if and only if $P$ has pairwise distinct roots in an algebraic closure of $F$.

Proof. Suppose that $\alpha \in \overline{F}$ is a root of both $P$ and $P'$. Then $P = (x - \alpha )Q$ for some polynomial $Q$. Taking derivatives we obtain $P' = Q + (x - \alpha )Q'$. Thus $\alpha $ is a root of $Q$. Hence we see that if $P$ and $P'$ have a common root, then $P$ does not have pairwise distinct roots. Conversely, if $P$ has a repeated root, i.e., $(x - \alpha )^2$ divides $P$, then $\alpha $ is a root of both $P$ and $P'$. Combined with Lemma 9.11.2 this proves the lemma. $\square$

Lemma 9.12.5. Let $F$ be a field and let $\overline{F}$ be an algebraic closure of $F$. Let $p > 0$ be the characteristic of $F$. Let $P$ be a polynomial over $F$. Then the set of roots of $P$ and $P(x^ p)$ in $\overline{F}$ have the same cardinality (not counting multiplicity).

Proof. Clearly, $\alpha $ is a root of $P(x^ p)$ if and only if $\alpha ^ p$ is a root of $P$. In other words, the roots of $P(x^ p)$ are the roots of $x^ p - \beta $, where $\beta $ is a root of $P$. Thus it suffices to show that the map $\overline{F} \to \overline{F}$, $\alpha \mapsto \alpha ^ p$ is bijective. It is surjective, as $\overline{F}$ is algebraically closed which means that every element has a $p$th root. It is injective because $\alpha ^ p = \beta ^ p$ implies $(\alpha - \beta )^ p = 0$ because the characteristic is $p$. And of course in a field $x^ p = 0$ implies $x = 0$. $\square$

Let $F$ be a field and let $P$ be an irreducible polynomial over $F$. Then we know that $P = Q(x^ q)$ for some separable irreducible polynomial $Q$ (Lemma 9.12.1) where $q$ is a power of the characteristic $p$ (and if the characteristic is zero, then $q = 1$2 and $Q = P$). By Lemma 9.12.5 the number of roots of $P$ and $Q$ in any algebraic closure of $F$ is the same. By Lemma 9.12.4 this number is equal to the degree of $Q$.

Definition 9.12.6. Let $F$ be a field. Let $P$ be an irreducible polynomial over $F$. The separable degree of $P$ is the cardinality of the set of roots of $P$ in any algebraic closure of $F$ (see discussion above). Notation $\deg _ s(P)$.

The separable degree of $P$ always divides the degree and the quotient is a power of the characteristic. If the characteristic is zero, then $\deg _ s(P) = \deg (P)$.

Situation 9.12.7. Here $F$ be a field and $K/F$ is a finite extension generated by elements $\alpha _1, \ldots , \alpha _ n \in K$. We set $K_0 = F$ and

\[ K_ i = F(\alpha _1, \ldots , \alpha _ i) \]

to obtain a tower of finite extensions $K = K_ n / K_{n - 1} / \ldots / K_0 = F$. Denote $P_ i$ the minimal polynomial of $\alpha _ i$ over $K_{i - 1}$. Finally, we fix an algebraic closure $\overline{F}$ of $F$.

Let $F$, $K$, $\alpha _ i$, and $\overline{F}$ be as in Situation 9.12.7. Suppose that $\varphi : K \to \overline{F}$ is a morphism of extensions of $F$. Then we obtain maps $\varphi _ i : K_ i \to \overline{F}$. In particular, we can take the image of $P_ i \in K_{i - 1}[x]$ by $\varphi _{i - 1}$ to get a polynomial $P_ i^\varphi \in \overline{F}[x]$.

Lemma 9.12.8. In Situation 9.12.7 the correspondence

\[ \mathop{\mathrm{Mor}}\nolimits _ F(K, \overline{F}) \longrightarrow \{ (\beta _1, \ldots , \beta _ n)\text{ as below}\} , \quad \varphi \longmapsto (\varphi (\alpha _1), \ldots , \varphi (\alpha _ n)) \]

is a bijection. Here the right hand side is the set of $n$-tuples $(\beta _1, \ldots , \beta _ n)$ of elements of $\overline{F}$ such that $\beta _ i$ is a root of $P_ i^\varphi $.

Proof. Let $(\beta _1, \ldots , \beta _ n)$ be an element of the right hand side. We construct a map of fields corresponding to it by induction. Namely, we set $\varphi _0 : K_0 \to \overline{F}$ equal to the given map $K_0 = F \subset \overline{F}$. Having constructed $\varphi _{i - 1} : K_{i - 1} \to \overline{F}$ we observe that $K_ i = K_{i - 1}[x]/(P_ i)$. Hence we can set $\varphi _ i$ equal to the unique map $K_ i \to \overline{F}$ inducing $\varphi _{i - 1}$ on $K_{i - 1}$ and mapping $x$ to $\beta _ i$. This works precisely as $\beta _ i$ is a root of $P_ i^\varphi $. Uniqueness implies that the two constructions are mutually inverse. $\square$

Lemma 9.12.9. In Situation 9.12.7 we have $|\mathop{\mathrm{Mor}}\nolimits _ F(K, \overline{F})| = \prod _{i = 1}^ n \deg _ s(P_ i)$.

Proof. This follows immediately from Lemma 9.12.8. Observe that a key ingredient we are tacitly using here is the well-definedness of the separable degree of an irreducible polynomial which was observed just prior to Definition 9.12.6. $\square$

We now use the result above to characterize separable field extensions.

Lemma 9.12.10. Assumptions and notation as in Situation 9.12.7. If each $P_ i$ is separable, i.e., each $\alpha _ i$ is separable over $K_{i - 1}$, then

\[ |\mathop{\mathrm{Mor}}\nolimits _ F(K, \overline{F})| = [K : F] \]

and the field extension $K/F$ is separable. If one of the $\alpha _ i$ is not separable over $K_{i - 1}$, then $|\mathop{\mathrm{Mor}}\nolimits _ F(K, \overline{F})| < [K : F]$.

Proof. If $\alpha _ i$ is separable over $K_{i - 1}$ then $\deg _ s(P_ i) = \deg (P_ i) = [K_ i : K_{i - 1}]$ (last equality by Lemma 9.9.2). By multiplicativity (Lemma 9.7.7) we have

\[ [K : F] = \prod [K_ i : K_{i - 1}] = \prod \deg (P_ i) = \prod \deg _ s(P_ i) = |\mathop{\mathrm{Mor}}\nolimits _ F(K, \overline{F})| \]

where the last equality is Lemma 9.12.9. By the exact same argument we get the strict inequality $|\mathop{\mathrm{Mor}}\nolimits _ F(K, \overline{F})| < [K : F]$ if one of the $\alpha _ i$ is not separable over $K_{i - 1}$.

Finally, assume again that each $\alpha _ i$ is separable over $K_{i - 1}$. We will show $K/F$ is separable. Let $\gamma = \gamma _1 \in K$ be arbitrary. Then we can find additional elements $\gamma _2, \ldots , \gamma _ m$ such that $K = F(\gamma _1, \ldots , \gamma _ m)$ (for example we could take $\gamma _2 = \alpha _1, \ldots , \gamma _{n + 1} = \alpha _ n$). Then we see by the last part of the lemma (already proven above) that if $\gamma $ is not separable over $F$ we would have the strict inequality $|\mathop{\mathrm{Mor}}\nolimits _ F(K, \overline{F})| < [K : F]$ contradicting the very first part of the lemma (already prove above as well). $\square$

Lemma 9.12.11. Let $K/F$ be a finite extension of fields. Let $\overline{F}$ be an algebraic closure of $F$. Then we have

\[ |\mathop{\mathrm{Mor}}\nolimits _ F(K, \overline{F})| \leq [K : F] \]

with equality if and only if $K$ is separable over $F$.

Proof. This is a corollary of Lemma 9.12.10. Namely, since $K/F$ is finite we can find finitely many elements $\alpha _1, \ldots , \alpha _ n \in K$ generating $K$ over $F$ (for example we can choose the $\alpha _ i$ to be a basis of $K$ over $F$). If $K/F$ is separable, then each $\alpha _ i$ is separable over $F(\alpha _1, \ldots , \alpha _{i - 1})$ by Lemma 9.12.3 and we get equality by Lemma 9.12.10. On the other hand, if we have equality, then no matter how we choose $\alpha _1, \ldots , \alpha _ n$ we get that $\alpha _1$ is separable over $F$ by Lemma 9.12.10. Since we can start the sequence with an arbitrary element of $K$ it follows that $K$ is separable over $F$. $\square$

Lemma 9.12.12. Let $E/k$ and $F/E$ be separable algebraic extensions of fields. Then $F/k$ is a separable extension of fields.

Proof. Choose $\alpha \in F$. Then $\alpha $ is separable algebraic over $E$. Let $P = x^ d + \sum _{i < d} a_ i x^ i$ be the minimal polynomial of $\alpha $ over $E$. Each $a_ i$ is separable algebraic over $k$. Consider the tower of fields

\[ k \subset k(a_0) \subset k(a_0, a_1) \subset \ldots \subset k(a_0, \ldots , a_{d - 1}) \subset k(a_0, \ldots , a_{d - 1}, \alpha ) \]

Because $a_ i$ is separable algebraic over $k$ it is separable algebraic over $k(a_0, \ldots , a_{i - 1})$ by Lemma 9.12.3. Finally, $\alpha $ is separable algebraic over $k(a_0, \ldots , a_{d - 1})$ because it is a root of $P$ which is irreducible (as it is irreducible over the possibly bigger field $E$) and separable (as it is separable over $E$). Thus $k(a_0, \ldots , a_{d - 1}, \alpha )$ is separable over $k$ by Lemma 9.12.10 and we conclude that $\alpha $ is separable over $k$ as desired. $\square$

Lemma 9.12.13. Let $E/k$ be a field extension. Then the elements of $E$ separable over $k$ form a subextension of $E/k$.

Proof. Let $\alpha , \beta \in E$ be separable over $k$. Then $\beta $ is separable over $k(\alpha )$ by Lemma 9.12.3. Thus we can apply Lemma 9.12.12 to $k(\alpha , \beta )$ to see that $k(\alpha , \beta )$ is separable over $k$. $\square$

[1] For nonalgebraic extensions this definition does not make sense and is not the correct one. We refer the reader to Algebra, Sections 10.42 and 10.44.
[2] A good convention for this chapter is to set $0^0 = 1$.

Comments (6)

Comment #4535 by Ashutosh on

Second paragraph of Lemma 09H9 may be needs a line saying that now we prove that is separable.

Comment #7036 by ranjit vohra on

Does every field have a separable extension field?

Comment #7040 by on

If is a field, then the trivial extension is separable.

Comment #7923 by gary knott on

Can you give an example where the separable degree (the number of distinct roots) of an irreducible polynomial over an infinite characteristic-value p field is not relatively-prime to the inseparable (common multiplicity of the roots) degree?

Comment #7925 by Laurent Moret-Bailly on

@7923: take , .

Post a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked.

In your comment you can use Markdown and LaTeX style mathematics (enclose it like $\pi$). A preview option is available if you wish to see how it works out (just click on the eye in the toolbar).

Unfortunately JavaScript is disabled in your browser, so the comment preview function will not work.

All contributions are licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.

In order to prevent bots from posting comments, we would like you to prove that you are human. You can do this by filling in the name of the current tag in the following input field. As a reminder, this is tag 09GZ. Beware of the difference between the letter 'O' and the digit '0'.