If R is a domain , then units in R[x] are non-zero constants

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

In the discussion regarding Problem 2.21 from Joseph Rotman's "Advanced Modern Algebra," it is established that if a polynomial \( p(x) \) in \( R[x] \) is a unit, then it must be a nonzero constant. The proof involves demonstrating that if \( p(x)q(x) = 1 \) for some polynomial \( q(x) \), the leading coefficients must satisfy conditions that lead to the conclusion that both \( p(x) \) and \( q(x) \) are constant polynomials. This is due to the impossibility of having non-zero leading terms in an integral domain, confirming that units in \( R \) are non-zero.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of integral domains
  • Familiarity with polynomial algebra in \( R[x] \)
  • Knowledge of units and inverses in ring theory
  • Basic concepts of algebraic structures from abstract algebra
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of integral domains and their implications on polynomial rings
  • Learn about units and their inverses in ring theory
  • Explore examples of polynomials in \( R[x] \) and their behavior as units
  • Review proofs related to polynomial identities and their implications in algebra
USEFUL FOR

Students of abstract algebra, mathematicians studying ring theory, and anyone interested in the properties of polynomials within integral domains.

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading Joseph Rotman's book Advanced Modern Algebra.

I need help with Problem 2.21 Part (i) on page 94.

Problem 2.21 Part (i) reads as follows:

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Let $$R$$ be a domain. Prove that if a polynomial in $$R[x]$$ is a unit, then it is a nonzero constant.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Now presumably the proof goes something like the following:

$$p(x)$$ is a unit $$ \Longrightarrow \exists \ q(x) \text{ such that } p(x)q(x) =1 $$

$$ \Longrightarrow p(x) \text{ possesses an inverse } [p(x)]^{-1}$$

$$ \Longrightarrow p(x) $$ is a nonzero constant

... ... BUT ...? ... what is a rigorous way to show that $$ p(x) $$ possesses an inverse $$ \Longrightarrow p(x) $$ is a nonzero constant

I would appreciate help in this matter.

Peter
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Suppose that $p(x)q(x) = 1$.

Write: $p(x) = a_0 + a_1x + a_2x^2 + \cdots + a_mx^m$ and:

$q(x) = b_0 + b_1x + b_2x^2 + \cdots + b_nx^n$

and furthermore stipulate that we have "no extra terms" so that $a_m,b_n \neq 0$

Then $p(x)q(x) = a_0b_0 + (a_0b_1 + a_1b_0)x + (a_0b_2 + a_1b_1 + a_2b_0)x^2 + \cdots + a_mb_nx^{m+n}$.

Thus:

$a_0b_0 = 1$
$a_0b_1 + a_1b_0 = 0$
$a_0b_2 + a_1b_1 + a_2b_0 = 0$
...
$a_mb_n = 0$

The last equation is impossible in an integral domain, by our restriction on $a_m,b_n$...UNLESS...$m = n = 0$.

But this means we have:

$p(x) = a_0$
$q(x) = b_0$

and since $a_0b_0 = 1$, these are both units in $R$, and the units in $R$ are of necessity non-zero (they cannot even be zero divisors).
 

Similar threads

Replies
48
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K