Proving the Primality of a Polynomial over Finite Fields

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Hello Kitty
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Polynomial Primitive
Hello Kitty
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
Let [tex]f = X^n + a_{n-1}X^{n-1} + \cdots + a_1X + a_o[/tex] be a polynomial over [tex]\mathbb{F}_q[/tex] for some prime power [tex]q[/tex] such that the least common multiple of the (multiplicative) orders of its roots (in [tex]\mathbb{F}_{q^n}[/tex]) is [tex]q^n -1[/tex]. I would like to show that one of these roots has order [tex]q^n -1[/tex]. (I.e. the polynomial is primitive.)

I realize that it is sufficient to show that it is irreducible since the orders of roots of irreducible polynomials are all the same.

I assume for contradiction that [tex]f= f_1 \cdots f_r[/tex], a product of [tex]\ge 2[/tex] (non-trivial) irreducible polynomials over [tex]\mathbb{F}_q[/tex]. Let [tex]deg(f_i) = d_i[/tex], so [tex]d_1 + \cdots + d_r = n[/tex].

Now the roots of [tex]f_i[/tex] lie in [tex]\mathbb{F}_{q^{d_i}}[/tex] and so have order dividing [tex]q^{d_i} - 1[/tex].

If all of the [tex]d_i[/tex] divide [tex]n[/tex] then all the roots lie in [tex]\mathbb{F}_{q^{max(d_i)}}[/tex] (noting the subfield theorem for finite fields) and hence all have order dividing [tex]q^{max(d_i)}-1[/tex] which is a contradiction. So we may assume that some [tex]d_i[/tex] does not divide [tex]n[/tex]. Does this imply that [tex]q^{d_i}-1[/tex] does not divide [tex]q^{n}-1[/tex]? (Certainly the converse of this statement is true.) If it did, I'd be done.
 
on Phys.org
I wonder why there's not much interest. Too hard, or boring maybe? Possibly I confused people with my erroneous statement:

If all of the [tex]d_i[/tex] divide n then all the roots lie in [tex]\mathbb{F}_{q^{max(d_i)}}[/tex] (noting the subfield theorem for finite fields) and hence all have order dividing [tex]: q^{max(d_i)}-1[/tex]...

Anyway, just in case anyone is interested, I think I've solved it. It's easier than I thought:

Since the roots of [tex]f_i[/tex] lie in [tex]\mathbb{F}_{q^{d_i}}[/tex] and so have order dividing [tex]q^{d_i} - 1[/tex], the least common multiple of their orders divides the least common multiple of the [tex]q^{d_i} - 1[/tex]. The latter clearly divides [tex](q^{d_1} - 1)(q^{d_2} - 1) ... (q^{d_r} - 1)[/tex], and so a sufficient condition for a contradiction would be that

[tex](q^{d_1} - 1)(q^{d_2} - 1) ... (q^{d_r} - 1) < (q^{d_1+ d_2 + \cdots + d_r} - 1)[/tex],

which is easy to verify.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
5K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
6K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K