Why is x not invertible in F[x]?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter bartieshaw
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Field Polynomial Ring
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the question of why the polynomial \( x \) is not invertible in the polynomial ring \( F[x] \), where \( F \) is a field. Participants explore the implications of polynomial degrees and the properties of integral domains versus fields.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant defines the polynomial ring \( R[x] \) and states that \( F[x] \) is an integral domain but not a field, citing that \( x \) does not have an inverse.
  • Another participant critiques an argument presented for showing that \( x \) has no inverse, noting that it appears circular as it assumes what it seeks to prove.
  • There is a discussion about the degree of polynomials, with one participant questioning whether the degree of the multiplicative identity (1) must be 1.
  • Participants clarify that the degree of a non-zero constant polynomial is defined to be zero, while the degree of the zero polynomial is often considered undefined or negative infinity.
  • One participant expresses uncertainty about the definitions of polynomial degrees across different textbooks and plans to consult their lecturer for clarification.
  • A later post reiterates the argument that to show \( x \) has no inverse, one must demonstrate that \( x \cdot f(x) \neq 1 \) for any non-zero polynomial \( f(x) \), emphasizing the implications of polynomial degrees.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that \( F[x] \) is an integral domain and that \( x \) does not have an inverse, but there is no consensus on the best way to prove this or on the definitions of polynomial degrees.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include varying definitions of polynomial degrees in different contexts and textbooks, as well as unresolved questions about the implications of these definitions on the argument regarding the invertibility of \( x \).

bartieshaw
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
Hey

First off, my terminology in the title may not be correct or what others use because when searching the forums for "polynomial ring" i had a lot of trouble finding anything that matched what i meant when i coined the term...


By polynomial ring i mean, for some ring R the polynomial ring over R is the ring R[x] = {a_0 + a_1x + ... + a_nx^n + ... ; a_i is in R} under the operations (+, .)

Now to my Question -

In the case that R (as above) is a Field, F, the i understand that F[x] is an integral domain, but not a field because of the simple example that my lecturers love to throw about, x in F[x] does not have an inverse (is not a unit)

Now i understand this argument and i don't dispute it, but i was wondering if any of you could tell me, or at least start me off (as it would probably help my understanding) on how to show / prove that x has no inverse in F[x]...

I have thought about this...but I am not sure the following argument is correct

suppose there was g(x) st. xg(x)=1

then xg(x)=x^0

hence g(x) = x^(0-1) = x^-1 which is not polynomial and hence not in F[x]

im thinking maybe a better argument would involve how i started but then somehow using the fact F[x] has no zero divisors would be more correct...but this is just guess work really.


sorry for the long post


cheers

Bart
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Also, the degree of xg(x) is 1+deg(g) > 0=deg(1). Your argument seems circular to me because it rests on the premise that x itself doesn't have a polynomial inverse in R[x], which is what you're proving.
 
phoenixthoth said:
Also, the degree of xg(x) is 1+deg(g) > 0=deg(1). Your argument seems circular to me because it rests on the premise that x itself doesn't have a polynomial inverse in R[x], which is what you're proving.


Yeah i know my attempt a a proof was pretty dismal...

Thankyou for your reply, i think that would be it. I am wondering does the degree of 1 (mult. identity) have to be 1? Maybe that is a stupid question, is it by definition deg 1 = 1...?
 
I think if f is a constant polynomial other than zero, deg(f) is defined to be zero and if f is the zero polynomial, then its degree is undefined or some people say negative infinity or something. I dunno, maybe some people define the degree of any constant polynomial to be zero...
 
Yeah we had deg 0 = - infinity, but nothing defined about constants so maybe it was assumed...


anyway, thanks a bundle for sorting that out for me, now at least when I am in bed i won't be thinking about maths... : )
 
I'm surprised deg is defined for the zero polynomial but not other constant polynomials...perhaps it's embedded within the definition for other polynomials?
 
hmm...ive looked it up in two textbooks now

The first one, Linear Algebra (LAY) - This is one was from 1st year - mentions non zero constant polynomials and says they have degree 0, but its talking about them in the context of the vector space P_n, so I am not sure if it would apply

My second textbook, A First Course in Abstract Algebra (FRALEIGH) - this one is from 2nd year - does discuss the degree of a polynomial in the context of the polynomial ring, but does not mention the degree of a non zero constant functin.

I will just ask my lecturer tomorrow, he comes around to everyone in the class individually before and after every lecture to see how we are going with his course so i shouldn't have any trouble getting to talk to him...


but for now, SLEEP, its 12.44 here and I am tired


THANK YOU again for your prompt and helpful responses


Bart
 
bartieshaw said:
In the case that R (as above) is a Field, F, the i understand that F[x] is an integral domain, but not a field because of the simple example that my lecturers love to throw about, x in F[x] does not have an inverse (is not a unit)
Yes, F[x] is an integral domain.

To show x has no inverse in F[x] we need to show x*f(x) ! = 1.

If, f(x) is a non-zero polynomial then deg f(x) = n where n>=0. And so deg (x*f(x)) >= n+1 >=1. Which means xf(x)!=1.

If, f(x)=0 then x*f(x) = 0 !=1. Unless this is a zero ring, i.e. 1=0. But by convention it is not considered a field. And so this is impossible.
 
the degree of a non zero constant is zero.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
7K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K