Does the Factor (x+1) Affect Polynomial Coset Uniqueness in F_2[x]?

  • Thread starter gonzo
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation discusses a problem involving polynomials in the ring {F_2[x] \over x^n-1} and the ideal generated by (x+1)g(x). The problem is to prove that for i \ne j, x^i+x^{i+1} and x^j+x^{j+1} cannot be in the same coset of this ideal. The speaker presents a proof but questions the necessity of the (x+1) factor in the ideal. They rearrange the expression and reach a contradiction, but it is unclear how the (x+1) factor plays a role in the proof. They ask if they are missing something or on the wrong track.
  • #1
gonzo
277
0
Okay, I have this problem in my book, an I'm pretty sure I solved it, but I there is something that is confuses me in the way the problem was asked.

Assume all polynomials are in the ring
[tex]
{F_2[x] \over x^n-1}
[/tex]
where [itex]n=2^m-1[/itex] and m>2

Let g(x) be the minimal polynomial of a primitive element of [itex]F_{2^m}[/itex]

We want to look at the ideal generated by (x+1)g(x). The problem is to prove that for [itex]i \ne j[/itex] the two polynomials [itex]x^i+x^{i+1}[/itex] and [itex]x^j+x^{j+1}[/itex] can't be in the same coset of this ideal.

My problem is that my proof seems to make the factor of (x+1) in the ideal unnecessary and that the way the problem is worded seems to imply that this factor has some importance to this property.

My proof is relatively simple. Assume j>i and j<n, and assume they are in the same coset, then we can find a pair of q's such that:

[tex]
(x+1)g(x)q_1+x^i+x^{i+1}=(x+1)g(x)q_2+x^j+x^{+1} (mod(x^n-1))
[/tex]

Rearranging we get:

[tex]
(x+1)g(x)(q_1+q_2)+(x+1)(x^i)(1+x^{j-i})=0 (mod(x^n-1))
[/tex]

Since g divides the sum of the left side and it divides the left hand term, it has to divide the right hand term on the left side as well (g is irreducible). It can't divide (x+1) and it can't divide [itex]x^i[/itex] so it has to divide the remaining factor [itex](1+x^{j-i})[/itex] but it can't divide this factor because it is the minimal polynomial of a primitive element of [itex]F_{2^m}[/itex]. Thus they can't be in the same coset since we have hit a contradiction.

However, none of this depends on the (x+1) factor in the ideal as far as I can see.

Am I missing something, or just totally off on the wrong track?=
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I can't follow the "rearranging". I get modulo ##x^n-1##
\begin{align*}
x^i +x^{i+1}&=x^j+x^{j+1}+(x+1)g(x)q(x)\\
(x+1)x^i -(x+1)x^j &= (x+1)g(x)q(x)\\
x^j(x^{i-j}-1) &= g(x)q(x)\\
x^j \,&|\,g(x)q(x)\\
x^j\,&|\,q(x)\\
(x^{i-j}-1) \,&|\,g(x)q'(x)
\end{align*}
where I used the factor ##x+1##.
 

FAQ: Does the Factor (x+1) Affect Polynomial Coset Uniqueness in F_2[x]?

1. What is a coset of ideals?

A coset of ideals is a set of elements in a ring that are obtained by adding a fixed element from the ring to all elements of a given ideal. In other words, it is the set of all elements that can be obtained by adding the same element to each element of the ideal.

2. How is a coset of ideals different from an ideal?

An ideal is a subset of a ring that is closed under addition and multiplication by elements of the ring. A coset of ideals, on the other hand, is a set of elements obtained by adding a fixed element to all elements of an ideal. In other words, while an ideal is a subset of a ring, a coset of ideals is a subset of the elements of a ring.

3. How do cosets of ideals relate to quotient rings?

Cosets of ideals are closely related to quotient rings. In fact, the elements of a quotient ring are the cosets of a given ideal. This means that the quotient ring is formed by taking all the cosets of the ideal and defining operations on them in a way that satisfies the ring axioms.

4. What is the significance of cosets of ideals in algebraic structures?

Cosets of ideals play an important role in understanding the structure of algebraic systems. They help in defining new operations such as quotient rings, which can provide insights into the properties of the original structure. Additionally, cosets of ideals are used in the proof of many important theorems in abstract algebra.

5. Can all elements of a ring be expressed as a coset of ideals?

No, not all elements of a ring can be expressed as a coset of ideals. Only elements that are in the same coset as the ideal element can be written as a coset. This means that not all elements of a ring can be obtained by adding a fixed element to all elements of an ideal.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top