Exercise 9.1.8

This exercise will present an alternate proof of (9.8) that doesn’t use symmetric polynomials.

(9.8) If ζ is a root of f, then so is ζ p .

where f is an irreducible factor of Φ n , and p a prime number such that p n .

Assume that ζ is a root of f such that f ( ζ p ) 0 . As in the text, q ( x ) [ x ] maps to the polynomial q ¯ ( x ) 𝔽 p [ x ] . Let g ( x ) be as in (9.7), i.e. Φ n ( x ) = f ( x ) g ( x ) .

(a)
Prove that ζ is a root of g ( x p ) , and conclude that f ( x ) g ( x p ) .
(b)
Use Gauss’s Lemma to explain why f ( x ) divides g ( x p ) in [ x ] , and conclude that f ¯ ( x ) divides g ¯ ( x p ) in 𝔽 p [ x ] .
(c)
Use Exercise 7 to prove that g ¯ ( x ) p = g ¯ ( x p ) , and conclude that f ¯ ( x ) divides g ¯ ( x ) p .
(d)
Now let h ( x ) 𝔽 p [ x ] be an irreducible factor of f ¯ ( x ) . Show that h ( x ) divides g ¯ ( x ) , so that h ( x ) 2 divides f ¯ ( x ) g ¯ ( x ) .
(e)
Conclude that h ( x ) 2 divides x n 1 𝔽 p [ x ] .
(f)
Use separability to obtain a contradiction.

Answers

Proof. As in the proof of Theorem 9.1.9, the Gauss’s Lemma in the form of Corollary 4.2.1 allows us to assume that there exists a polynomial f ( x ) [ x ] of Φ n ( x ) such that Φ n ( x ) = f ( x ) g ( x ) , f ( x ) , g ( x ) [ x ] , where f is monic and irreducible over . Let p be a prime number such that p n .

Reasoning by contradiction, we suppose that ζ is a root of f such that f ( ζ p ) 0 .

(a)
As ζ is the root of f , where f divides Φ n , ζ is a n th primitive root of unity. Since p n , p n = 1 , hence ζ p is also a n th primitive root of unity by Exercise 7(a), therefore 0 = Φ ( ζ p ) = f ( ζ p ) g ( ζ p ) . As f ( ζ p ) 0 , g ( ζ p ) = 0 , so

ζ is a root of g ( x p ) .

As f is irreducible, f is the minimal polynomial of ζ over , and ζ is a root of g ( x p ) [ x ] , hence

f ( x ) g ( x p ) .

(b)
As f is monic, the refined division algorithm of Exercise 4 show that the quotient q ( x ) of g ( x p ) by f ( x ) lies in [ x ] , so f ( x ) divides g ( x p ) in [ x ] .

The projection homomorphism on 𝔽 p [ x ] gives g ¯ ( x p ) = f ¯ ( x ) q ¯ ( x ) , thus f ¯ ( x ) divides g ¯ ( x p ) in 𝔽 p [ x ] .

(c)

As the characteristic of 𝔽 p ( x ) is p , writing g ¯ ( x ) = i = 0 r a i x i 𝔽 p [ x ] , then (as in Exercise 7)

g ¯ ( x ) p = ( i = 0 r a i x i ) p = i = 0 r a i p x ip = i = 0 r a i x ip = g ¯ ( x p ) .

Therefore f ¯ ( x ) divides g ¯ ( x ) p in 𝔽 p [ x ] .

(d)
Let h ( x ) 𝔽 p [ x ] an irreducible factor of f ¯ ( x ) . Then h ( x ) g ¯ ( x ) p . Since h is irreducible (hence prime) in 𝔽 p [ x ] , then h g ¯ .

h ( x ) f ¯ ( x ) , h ( x ) g ¯ ( x ) , so h ( x ) 2 f ¯ ( x ) g ¯ ( x ) .

(e)
Therefore h 2 Φ ¯ n , and Φ ¯ n x n 1 , thus h 2 x n 1 F p [ x ] .
(f)
As deg ( h ) > 1 , every root of h in the splitting root of x n 1 𝔽 p [ x ] is not a simple root, thus x n 1 would not be separable.

But n is relatively prime to p , so ( x n 1 ) = n x n 1 is relatively prime to x n 1 , and so x n 1 𝔽 p [ x ] is separable: this is a contradiction, therefore.

f ( ζ ) = 0 f ( ζ p ) = 0 .

We conclude that Φ n is irreducible as in the conclusion of the proof of Theorem 9.1.9.

User profile picture
2022-07-19 00:00
Comments