To get the general picture, first consider a simple example.
F,K,L fields, with K,L sub F (subfields)
Consider the followinf wxample:
1) the largest subfield of F contained in both
2) the smallest subfield of
Now consider the general case. The largest (sub)field of F contained in both K and L is clearly
Let F,K,L be fields, with
Let
Claim: M is the largest sunfield contained in both K and L.
Proof: To start wi M is a field.
So, a subfield of
This, shows that M=K cap L is the maximal subfield of F with respect to this property. Hence the claim is true.
To show the existence of the smallest subfield containing K and L , proceed as in the proof.. Note that we cant work with the union of K and L , as the union of two fields need not be a field. So, a different approach is needed.
Let F,K,L be fields with
Claim:
Proofs: Define family S={P:P a subfield of F, P contains both K and L}
To start with, note that S is non - empty family, as F in S
Completing the proof that M , as defined, is the smallest subfield of F containing both K and L.
Proof: Define the family S={P:P a subfield of F, P contains both K and L}
To start with, note that S is non - empty family, as
Define
As P contains both
M is the intersection of all such P, M is the minimal among all subfields of F containg both K and L
Suppose G is a group, H a subgroup of G, and a and b elements of G. If
Find all zero divisors of z_81