Irreducible polynomial in Q[x]?

  • Thread starter Thread starter pivoxa15
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Polynomial
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around determining the irreducibility of the polynomial y(x)=x^3-7x^2+14x-4 in the context of Q[x], using only pen and paper methods. Participants explore the implications of the factor theorem and the existence of rational roots.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the use of the factor theorem and the existence of linear factors. There is a consideration of whether a zero exists in Q or R, and attempts to identify rational roots through numerical methods and polynomial factorization.

Discussion Status

The discussion includes various approaches to identifying rational roots, with some participants suggesting the use of specific tests for rational roots. There is acknowledgment of the complexity of the problem, and while some guidance has been offered, no consensus has been reached on the irreducibility of the polynomial.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the problem requires only pen and paper methods, which may limit the approaches available for determining irreducibility. There is also a mention of the polynomial's integer coefficients and the implications for potential rational roots.

pivoxa15
Messages
2,250
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


Determine whether y(x)=x^3-7x^2+14x-4 is irreducible in Q[x] with only pen and paper.

The Attempt at a Solution


The factor theorem would be good to use as if it isn't irreducible there must be a linear factor (x-a) with a in Q. I have worked out that at leat one zero does exist because for x<0, y(x)<0 & x>0, y(x)>0. But is this x value in Q or R?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
pivoxa15 said:

Homework Statement


Determine whether y(x)=x^3-7x^2+14x-4 is irreducible in Q[x] with only pen and paper.

The Attempt at a Solution


The factor theorem would be good to use as if it isn't irreducible there must be a linear factor (x-a) with a in Q. I have worked out that at leat one zero does exist because for x<0, y(x)<0 & x>0, y(x)>0. But is this x value in Q or R?

From what I can understand, there are no basic linear factors (x-a) where a is an integer. The only way I can possibly think you can solve -not even reduce it, for real values, is by finding the numerical factors i.e.
set it to zero;
[tex]x^3 - 7x^2 + 14x - 4 = 0[/tex]
[tex](x-0.341032918083) (x^2-6.65896708192 x + 11.7290730246) = 0[/tex]
hence,
[tex]x-0.341032918083 = 0[/tex]
[tex]x^2-6.65896708192 x + 11.7290730246 = 0[/tex]
cannot have a negative discriminant for real values
therefore
[tex]x = 0.341032918083[/tex]

In answer to your question, "it" is irreducible in Q[x] with only pen and paper.

Steven
- this is quite tricky, really got me thinking ...
 
All those things you wrote down are rational, so you just factored it over the rationals.

There is an elementary result that states any rational solution to a monic integer polynomial is an integer.
 
There's a simple test to see if a polynomial with integer coefficients has rational roots. Assume the polynomial

[tex]f(x) = a_n x^n + ... +a_1 x +a_0[/tex]

has r=p/q as a root, where p/q is in lowest terms (ie, (p,q)=1). Then plugging in r and multiplying both sides by qn, we have:

[tex]a_n p^n + a_{n-1} p^{n-1} q ... + a_1 p q^{n-1} + a_0 q^n = 0[/tex]

Rearranging we get:

[tex]a_n p^n = -q(a_{n-1} p^{n-1} ... + a_1 p q^{n-2} + a_0 q^{n-1})[/tex]

In other words, q divides an pn. Since (p,q)=1, this is only possible if q divides an.
A similar argument shows that p divides a0.

Thus the only possible rational roots of f(x) are of the form:

[tex]r = \pm \frac{p}{q}[/tex]

where p is a positive divisor of a0 and q is a positive divisor of an.

In your case, we see the only possible rational roots are [itex]\pm 1, \pm 2, \pm 4[/itex]. So just plug these in and see if they're roots. If none of them are, then you know it has no rational roots.
 
Last edited:
I agree wholeheartedly with StatusX's explanation of how to do this problem. But, I'll point out that synthetic division using the roots is usually quicker than plugging in those values. If your remainder is zero, then it's a root.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
6K
Replies
48
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K