Eisenstein's Irreducibility Criterion


by roam
Tags: criterion, eisenstein, irreducibility
roam
roam is offline
#1
Oct9-10, 10:30 PM
P: 884
I have a question about the application of Eisenstein’s Criterion. I want to show that

g(x)=x4+4x3+7x+5 is irreducible over [tex]\mathbb{Q}[/tex].

That means I need to find a prime number p such that

[tex]p \nmid 1[/tex] , [tex]p | 4[/tex] , [tex]p | 7[/tex], [tex]p | 5[/tex] and [tex]p^2 \nmid 5[/tex].

But unfortunately I can't see any prime number which would satisfies this!

I think there is a theorem that says if g(x+1) is irreducible then g(x) is irreducible. So in this case

g(x+1) = x4 + 8x3 + 18 x2 + 16 x + 17

But again I cannot find a p to satisfiy Eisenstein’s irreducibility criterion... So why does the method fail? Then what other method can one use to establish g(x)'s irreducibility?
Phys.Org News Partner Science news on Phys.org
Review: With Galaxy S5, Samsung proves less can be more
Making graphene in your kitchen
Study casts doubt on climate benefit of biofuels from corn residue
gerben
gerben is offline
#2
Oct9-10, 11:24 PM
P: 540
You could use:
[tex] (g\mod p) \text{ is irreducible in } (\mathbb{Z}/p\mathbb{Z})[X] \Rightarrow
g \text{ is irreducible in } \mathbb{Z}[X] \Rightarrow
g \text{ is irreducible in } \mathbb{Q}[X]. [/tex]

where p is prime
losiu99
losiu99 is offline
#3
Oct10-10, 02:31 AM
P: 134
g(x+2) works for Eisenstein.

roam
roam is offline
#4
Oct11-10, 11:32 PM
P: 884

Eisenstein's Irreducibility Criterion


Quote Quote by losiu99 View Post
g(x+2) works for Eisenstein.
Are you sure?

[tex]g(x+2)= x^4 + 12 x^3 + 48 x^2 + 87 x + 67[/tex]

2 does not divide 87 and 3 does not divide 67. So there are no primes to use for Eisenstein...

You could use:
[tex] (g\mod p) \text{ is irreducible in } (\mathbb{Z}/p\mathbb{Z})[X] \Rightarrow g \text{ is irreducible in } \mathbb{Z}[X] \Rightarrowg \text{ is irreducible in } \mathbb{Q}[X]. [/tex]

where p is prime
I haven't seen this before but there s a similar test in my book called "Mod p irreducibility test", where p is a prime, here we must reduce the polynomial in Zp and see if the reduce polynomial is irreducible over Zp, if it is, it imples irreducibility over Q for the original polynomial. So here's what I've done:

Let g(x)=x4+4x3+7x+5. Then over [tex]\mathbb{Z}_2[/tex], we have [tex]\bar{g}(x)=x^4+x+1[/tex]. If we show that [tex]\bar{g}(x)[/tex] is irreducible over [tex]\mathbb{Z}_2[/tex] that implies that g(x) is irreducible over [tex]\mathbb{Q}[/tex].

But how do we show this?? We surely can't use Eisenstein here...
gerben
gerben is offline
#5
Oct12-10, 12:30 AM
P: 540
Quote Quote by roam View Post
Let g(x)=x4+4x3+7x+5. Then over [tex]\mathbb{Z}_2[/tex], we have [tex]\bar{g}(x)=x^4+x+1[/tex]. If we show that [tex]\bar{g}(x)[/tex] is irreducible over [tex]\mathbb{Z}_2[/tex] that implies that g(x) is irreducible over [tex]\mathbb{Q}[/tex].

But how do we show this?? We surely can't use Eisenstein here...
In [tex]\mathbb{Z}_2[/tex] all coefficients are either 1 or 0, so ...
roam
roam is offline
#6
Oct12-10, 01:23 AM
P: 884
Quote Quote by gerben View Post
In [tex]\mathbb{Z}_2[/tex] all coefficients are either 1 or 0, so ...
What do you mean?? I know that [tex]\bar{g}(0)=1[/tex] and [tex]\bar{g}(1)=1[/tex] in [tex]\mathbb{Z}_2[/tex], so there are no zeros. But we can't use this to conclude that it is irreducible because this test is only for degrees 2 and 3, so I can't use it when the polynomial has degree 4...

And for the Eisenstein we need a prime that divides 1 and doesn not divide 1 at the same time which is impossible!
gerben
gerben is offline
#7
Oct12-10, 04:36 AM
P: 540
Quote Quote by roam View Post
What do you mean?? I know that [tex]\bar{g}(0)=1[/tex] and [tex]\bar{g}(1)=1[/tex] in [tex]\mathbb{Z}_2[/tex], so there are no zeros. But we can't use this to conclude that it is irreducible because this test is only for degrees 2 and 3, so I can't use it when the polynomial has degree 4...

And for the Eisenstein we need a prime that divides 1 and doesn not divide 1 at the same time which is impossible!
You have [tex]\bar{g}(x)=x^4+x+1[/tex]. You cannot divide out a factor x, so if there were some factor it would have to be of the form (x^n+q) for some polynomial q and some integer n. Any coefficient in these polynomials is 1, use this to argue that you must have [tex](x^n+q_1)(x^n+q_2) \neq x^4+x+1[/tex] for all [tex]q_1,q_2\in \mathbb{Z}_2[X][/tex].
roam
roam is offline
#8
Oct12-10, 07:45 PM
P: 884
Quote Quote by gerben View Post
You have [tex]\bar{g}(x)=x^4+x+1[/tex]. You cannot divide out a factor x, so if there were some factor it would have to be of the form (x^n+q) for some polynomial q and some integer n. Any coefficient in these polynomials is 1, use this to argue that you must have [tex](x^n+q_1)(x^n+q_2) \neq x^4+x+1[/tex] for all [tex]q_1,q_2\in \mathbb{Z}_2[X][/tex].
I think it's better to use xn and xm because they can be different as long as n+m=4.

[tex](x^n+q_1)(x^m+q_2) = x^{n+m} + q_2 x^n + q_1 x^m +q_1q_2[/tex]

In order for all coefficients to be 1 or 0, q1=q2=1 OR 0. Then we have:

[tex](x^n+1)(x^m+1) = x^{n+m} + x^n + x^m + 1[/tex] .....(1)

or

[tex](x^n+0)(x^m+0) = x^{n+m}[/tex] .....(2)

The polynomial (2) is not equal to [tex]\bar{g}(x)=x^4+x+1[/tex], and in polynomial (2) regardless of our choice for m and n, we will never end up with [tex]\bar{g}(x)[/tex]:

n,m = 4,0 [tex]\implies x^4+x^4+1[/tex]
n,m = 3,1 [tex]\implies x^4 + x^3 + x^2 +1[/tex]
n,m = 2,2 [tex]\implies x^4 + x^2 + x^2 +1[/tex]

Is this correct now?
losiu99
losiu99 is offline
#9
Oct13-10, 04:37 AM
P: 134
Quote Quote by losiu99 View Post
g(x+2) works for Eisenstein.
Sorry, I must have made some terrible mistake
gerben
gerben is offline
#10
Oct13-10, 07:04 PM
P: 540
Quote Quote by roam View Post
I think it's better to use xn and xm because they can be different as long as n+m=4.
Yes, I should have done that

Quote Quote by roam View Post
In order for all coefficients to be 1 or 0, q1=q2=1 OR 0. Then we have:

[tex](x^n+1)(x^m+1) = x^{n+m} + x^n + x^m + 1[/tex] .....(1)
or
[tex](x^n+0)(x^m+0) = x^{n+m}[/tex] .....(2)
No, q1 and q2 could be any polynomial just all the coefficients in those polynomials are either 0 or 1, i.e. all the ai in [tex]q_1 = \sum a_i X^i [/tex] are either 0 or 1 and all the bi in [tex]q_2 = \sum b_i X^i [/tex] are either 0 or 1.

Quote Quote by roam View Post
The polynomial (2) is not equal to [tex]\bar{g}(x)=x^4+x+1[/tex], and in polynomial (1) regardless of our choice for m and n, we will never end up with [tex]\bar{g}(x)[/tex]:

n,m = 4,0 [tex]\implies x^4+x^4+1[/tex]
n,m = 3,1 [tex]\implies x^4 + x^3 + x^2 +1[/tex]
n,m = 2,2 [tex]\implies x^4 + x^2 + x^2 +1[/tex]

Is this correct now?
You can use your idea like this:

if n,m = 4,0 then we have [tex] (x^4 + q_1) (1+q_2) =...[/tex] which cannot be equal to [tex]\bar{g}[/tex] because...
if n,m = 3,1 then we have [tex] (x^3 + q_1) (x+q_2) =... [/tex] which cannot be equal to [tex]\bar{g}[/tex] because...
if n,m = 2,2 then we have [tex] (x^2 + q_1) (x^2+q_2) =...[/tex] which cannot be equal to [tex]\bar{g}[/tex] because...

(better not use "\implies" here, whenever you use "\implies" you need to make really sure that whenever the thing on the left of the arrow is true that then also the thing on the right is true, and it is really easy to forget something on the left)
roam
roam is offline
#11
Oct14-10, 04:32 AM
P: 884
Thank you so much;

We have [tex](x^n+q_1)(x^m+q_2) = x^{n+m} + q_2x^n + q_1x^m + q_1q_2[/tex]

if n,m = 4,0 then we have [tex] (x^4 + q_1) (1+q_2) = x^4+q_2x^4+q_1+q_1q_2[/tex] which cannot be equal to [tex]\bar{g}[/tex] because regardless of what value (1 or 0) we choose for the coefficients we will never get [tex]\bar{g}[/tex].

if n,m = 3,1 then we have [tex] (x^3 + q_1) (x+q_2) =x^4+q_2x^3+q_1x+q_1q_2[/tex] which cannot be equal to [tex]\bar{g}[/tex] because no possible choice of coefficients can make it equal to [tex]\bar{g}[/tex].

if n,m = 2,2 then we have [tex] (x^2 + q_1) (x^2+q_2) =x^4+q_2x^2+q_1x^2+q_1q_2[/tex] which cannot be equal to [tex]\bar{g}[/tex] because whatver value we pick for [tex]q_1[/tex] and [tex]q_2[/tex] we will never end up with [tex]\bar{g}[/tex].

This is okay now I guess?


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Criterion for Irreducibility of a polynomial in several variables? Linear & Abstract Algebra 5
irreducibility of a polynomial by eisenstein and substitution Calculus & Beyond Homework 2
proving irreducibility Calculus & Beyond Homework 1
Irreducibility problem help Linear & Abstract Algebra 2
Irreducibility Question (Rationals, Eisenstein!) Calculus & Beyond Homework 4