Prove that there are infinitely many irreducible polynomials in Z5.

  • MHB
  • Thread starter Kiwi1
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Polynomials
In summary, the conversation discusses an attempt at a proof by assuming the existence of a finite number of irreducible polynomials in a field and using polynomial multiplication and Fermat's little theorem to try and create a larger irreducible polynomial. However, the conversation ends with the realization that the approach does not work and there must be a certain class of polynomials that needs to be excluded. It is also mentioned that the original attempt at proof is more of a proof by contradiction rather than induction. Additionally, it is noted that the assumption of a complete list of irreducible polynomials is what leads to the contradiction.
  • #1
Kiwi1
108
0
Here is my first (incorrect) attempt at a proof:

Assume that there are finitely many (say n) irreducible polynomials in \(\mathbb{Z}_5\).

Let \(a(x)=p_1(x)p_2(x)...p_i(x)...p_n(x) +1\) where \(p_i(x)\) is the i-th irreducible polynomial in \(\mathbb{Z}_5\).

a(x) is irreducible and not equal to any \(p_i(x)\) so there are at least n+1 irreducible polynomials. There are infinately many by induction.

This does not work because x(x-1)(x-2)(x-3)(x-4)=0 in Z5 so a(x)=1 and that does equal one of \(p_i(x)\).Another possibility. Perhaps I can assume a(x) to be the largest (highest degree) irreducible polynomial and the use a(x) to create a larger one. That seems unlikely because that approach does not work with prime numbers.

Or maybe I can use Fermat's little theorem to somehow create an irreducible polynomial of any degree.

Nothing I try seems to work and from the context in my book this should be easy.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
NO!

$a(x) = x(x-1)(x -2)(x - 3)(x - 4) = x(x^2 - 1)(x^2 - 4) = x(x^2 + 1)(x^2 - 1) = x(x^4 - 1) = x^5 - x$

and thus $a(x) + 1 = x^5 - x + 1$.

$a(x)$ is NOT the $0$-polynomial, $\Bbb Z_5[x]$ is NOT the same thing as polynomial functions $\Bbb Z_5 \to \Bbb Z_5$.

Put another way, $x$ is held to be transcendental over $\Bbb Z_5$ but clearly any element of $\Bbb Z_5$ is algebraic over $\Bbb Z_5$.

Your original approach is sound, but there is a certain class of polynomials you have to exclude, do you know what they are?
 
  • #3
Thanks. Usually when doing a proof by induction we start with n=1 or sometimes n=2. In this case I would need to start with n=6 or more, and to have the initial set of irreducible polys include all of the units plus at least two irreducible polynomials of degree 1 or greater. Alternatively, I could restrict a(x) to the product of monic polys, with n at least 3.

Is this what you mean by having to exclude a class of polynomials (i.e. the constants)?

Once we have the constants out of the way every time we add another irreducible polynomial to our formation of a(x) the degree of a(x) increases by at least one so I don't see how we can run into trouble.
 
  • #4
Units are, by definition, NOT irreducible (this is for similar reasons as 1 not being a prime number, it would, for example, prevent the concept of a unique factorization domain even EXISTING).

In a field, all the non-zero elements are units. So we have to start with the polynomials that are at least degree 1, to find ANY irreducible polynomials.

It's not much of a loss in generality to assume our polynomials are monic (although there is no *need* to do so), because if the leading coefficient of $p(x)$ is $a \neq 0$, we have that:

$\dfrac{1}{a}p(x)$

is monic, and is an associate of $p(x)$.

Note what you are essentially doing is a proof by *contradiction*, not induction:

1) you assume the list of irreducible polynomials is finite.

2) you produce a polynomial that is not divisible by any on your list of 1) (that is, it is not a multiple OR an associate of a multiple of any on your list).

3) You use the fact that the polynomial ring $F[x]$ is a UFD, for any field $F$, to derive a contradiction, which thus disproves that 1) could ever be true, so its negation must be true.

Some additional comments: for a given (known complete) list of $n$ irreducible polynomials $p_k(x)$ it is not necessarily the case that:

$p_1(x)\cdots p_n(x) + 1$ is, in fact, irreducible.

The contradiction lies in assuming the list $\{p_k(x)\}$ is COMPLETE.
 

1. What is an irreducible polynomial?

An irreducible polynomial is a polynomial in which it cannot be factored into two or more polynomials with lower degrees. In other words, it cannot be broken down into simpler terms.

2. What does Z5 refer to?

Z5 refers to the integers modulo 5, also known as the finite field of order 5. This is a mathematical structure where the only possible values are 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4. It is denoted by Z5 or GF(5).

3. How can you prove that there are infinitely many irreducible polynomials in Z5?

This can be proven using a proof by contradiction. Assume that there is a finite number of irreducible polynomials in Z5, then we can list them all out. However, by considering the polynomial x^n + 1, where n is a prime number, we can show that this polynomial is irreducible in Z5 and therefore, there must be infinitely many irreducible polynomials in Z5.

4. Are there any other methods to prove this statement?

Yes, there are other methods such as using the fact that every polynomial in Z5 can be expressed as a product of irreducible polynomials, and then using this to show that there must be infinitely many irreducible polynomials in Z5. Another method is to use the concept of cyclotomic polynomials, which are polynomials that are irreducible over Z5.

5. What is the significance of proving that there are infinitely many irreducible polynomials in Z5?

This statement has important implications in various areas of mathematics, such as number theory and algebraic geometry. It also plays a crucial role in cryptography, as irreducible polynomials in Z5 are used in the generation of finite fields, which are used in many encryption schemes.

Similar threads

  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
24
Views
4K
Back
Top