Showing Difference of Relatively Prime Polynomials is Irreducible

slamminsammya
Messages
14
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Let K be a field, and f,g are relatively prime in K[x]. Show that f-yg is irreducible in K(y)[x].


Homework Equations


There exist polynomials a,b\in K[x] such that af+bg=u where u\in K. We also have the Euclidean algorithm for polynomials.


The Attempt at a Solution


Assuming towards a contradiction that f-yg were reducible, we have f-yg=hk where h,k\in K(y)[x] are not units. Then by the relative primacy condition we also have af+bg=1, so that multiplying both sides by hk yields hk(af+bg)=hk=f-yg, but this is a contradiction since f-yg is certainly not in our original ring of polynomials (assuming that y\notin K), but the left hand side is most certainly in the original ring. The problem is I don't feel confident at all in this argument. I am having trouble conceptualizing what f-yg is.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
slamminsammya said:
...multiplying both sides by hk yields hk(af+bg)=hk=f-yg, but this is a contradiction since f-yg is certainly not in our original ring of polynomials (assuming that y\notin K),
Correct.
slamminsammya said:
but the left hand side is most certainly in the original ring.
This is incorrect. Each part of the equation hk(af+bg)=hk=f-yg was derived by directly applying noncontradictory definitions (namely (i) af+bg := 1 and (ii) hk := f-yg), so you won't be able to get a contradiction without doing something else.
 
slamminsammya said:
The problem is I don't feel confident at all in this argument. I am having trouble conceptualizing what f-yg is.

Think of y as a constant (which is what it is). It might help to use a different letter, say \alpha, instead of y for the time being so you don't accidentally forget it's not a variable.
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top