3

We assume $K$ as a field of characteristic zero. By a field of algebraic functions of one variable over $K$ we mean a field $R$ satisfying $R=K(x,y)$ with $x$ being transcendental over $K$, and $R$ is algebraic over $K(x)$.

My question is: Whether there exist a subfield $F \subset R$ and $a \in R$ such that $R=F(a)$ with $a$ being transcendental over $F$. (In the case of rational function fields, this result follows easily.)

Arctic Char
  • 16,972
Lei
  • 31

1 Answers1

2

I believe the answer is no, not in general. I construct a purported example below - I would scrutinize this carefully before believing it.

Assume that $K$ is algebraically closed.

From $R = F(a)$, with $a$ trascendental over $F$, we have that $\text{trdeg}_F(R) = 1$.

We also have, by assumption, that $\text{trdeg}_K(R) = 1$. By the fact that transcendence degree is additive in towers (Lemma 9.26.5 in the stacks project), we have that $\text{trdeg}_K(R) = \text{trdeg}_K(F) + \text{trdeg}_F(R)$, from which $\text{trdeg}_K(F) = 0$ follows.

Since an extension of transcendence degree $0$ is algebraic, this implies that $F$ is an algebraic extension of $K$. Since $K$ is algebraically closed, we have $K = F$.

Thus, $R = F(a) = K(a)$.

We recall that if $K\subset R$ is any field extension, and $a \in R$ is transcendental over $K$, then $K(a) \cong K(x)$, where $K(x)$ denotes the field of rational functions in formal variable $x$.

Now, if $R$ is the function field of any plane curve over $K$ that is not birational to $\mathbb{P}^1_k$, we have that $R = K(x,y)$, with $x$ transcendental over $K$ and $y$ algebraic over $K(x)$, but cannot have $R \cong K(x)$. An elliptic curve provides an example, for instance see this question.

Thus, we conclude that for such $R$, one cannot find a subfield $F$ with $R = F(a)$ and $a$ transcendental over $F$.

Elle Najt
  • 21,422
  • Thank you for your answer!

    Now I am just wondering, if we don’t assume $K$ is algebraically closed, does this result hold?

    – Lei Sep 01 '20 at 07:23
  • @Lei I think similar examples exist, but have gotten bogged down in the following commutative algebra question: Does the total ring of fractions construction commute with tensor products (or at least, base changing field extensions)? (I'm not sure if its a special case of localization commuting with tensoring.) If yes, I think you can set up counter examples by making it so that they base change into something like the above example.... noting that if $F$ is algebraic over $K$, then after tensoring with $\bar{K}$ it splits up in a direct product of copies of $\bar{K}$. – Elle Najt Sep 01 '20 at 18:11
  • Thank you for your comment! – Lei Sep 02 '20 at 03:02
  • @Lei No problem. A more geometric way to say the construction I was trying to put together: Under your assumptions, R would be a projective curve over F. After you base change to the algebraic closure of K, F would split up into a bunch of points (copies of spec $\bar{K}$), and R would look like a disjoint union of projective spaces over $\bar{K}$. But if $R$ was the function field of some elliptic curve defined over K, base changing it to the algebraic closure would never look this way. I'm not an algebraic geometer, so I'd want to check the commutative algebra details before believing this. – Elle Najt Sep 03 '20 at 02:32