Difference between revisions of "1993 IMO Problems/Problem 1"
(→Solution) |
|||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
We have that <math>3=b_0c_0</math>, or <math>3|b_0c_0</math>. WLOG, let <math>3|b_0</math> (and thus <math>3\not|c_0</math>). Since <math>b_0c_1+b_1c_0=0</math> and <math>3</math> divides <math>b_0</math> but not <math>c_0</math>, we need that <math>3|b_1</math>. We can keep on going up the chain until we get that <math>3|b_{n-2}</math>. Then, by equating coefficients once more, we get that <math>b_0c_{n-1}+b_1c_{n-2}+\ldots+b_{n-2}c_1+b_{n-1}c_0=5</math>. Taking the equation <math>\pmod3</math> gives that <math>b_{n-1}c_0\equiv2\pmod3</math>. This implies that <math>b_{n-1}\neq0</math>. Thus, the degree of <math>g\left(x\right)</math> is at least <math>n-1</math>. However, because <math>h\left(x\right)</math> is a non-constant factor of <math>f\left(x\right)</math>, we have that the degree of <math>g\left(x\right)</math> is at most <math>n-1</math>. Thus, the degree of <math>g\left(x\right)</math> is <math>n-1</math>, implying that the degree of <math>h\left(x\right)</math> is <math>1</math>. | We have that <math>3=b_0c_0</math>, or <math>3|b_0c_0</math>. WLOG, let <math>3|b_0</math> (and thus <math>3\not|c_0</math>). Since <math>b_0c_1+b_1c_0=0</math> and <math>3</math> divides <math>b_0</math> but not <math>c_0</math>, we need that <math>3|b_1</math>. We can keep on going up the chain until we get that <math>3|b_{n-2}</math>. Then, by equating coefficients once more, we get that <math>b_0c_{n-1}+b_1c_{n-2}+\ldots+b_{n-2}c_1+b_{n-1}c_0=5</math>. Taking the equation <math>\pmod3</math> gives that <math>b_{n-1}c_0\equiv2\pmod3</math>. This implies that <math>b_{n-1}\neq0</math>. Thus, the degree of <math>g\left(x\right)</math> is at least <math>n-1</math>. However, because <math>h\left(x\right)</math> is a non-constant factor of <math>f\left(x\right)</math>, we have that the degree of <math>g\left(x\right)</math> is at most <math>n-1</math>. Thus, the degree of <math>g\left(x\right)</math> is <math>n-1</math>, implying that the degree of <math>h\left(x\right)</math> is <math>1</math>. | ||
− | From this fact, we have that there must exist | + | From this fact, we have that there must exist an integer root of <math>f\left(x\right)</math>. However, when <math>x</math> is an integer, <math>x^n + 5x^{n - 1} \equiv x^{n - 2}x(x + 1) \equiv 0 \pmod{2}</math>, meaning <math>f(x)</math> is odd, so <math>x</math> cannot be a root of <math>f</math>. |
− | + | Hence, <math>f\left(x\right)</math> cannot be expressed as <math>g\left(x\right)h\left(x\right)</math> for polynomials <math>g\left(x\right)</math> and <math>h\left(x\right)</math> in <math>\mathbb{R}</math>. This means that <math>f\left(x\right)</math> cannot be expressed as the product of two non-constant polynomials with integer coefficients. | |
Q.E.D. | Q.E.D. |
Revision as of 11:22, 16 June 2024
Problem
Let , where is an integer. Prove that cannot be expressed as the product of two non-constant polynomials with integer coefficients.
Solution
For the sake of contradiction, assume that for polynomials and in . Furthermore, let with if and with if . This gives that .
We have that , or . WLOG, let (and thus ). Since and divides but not , we need that . We can keep on going up the chain until we get that . Then, by equating coefficients once more, we get that . Taking the equation gives that . This implies that . Thus, the degree of is at least . However, because is a non-constant factor of , we have that the degree of is at most . Thus, the degree of is , implying that the degree of is .
From this fact, we have that there must exist an integer root of . However, when is an integer, , meaning is odd, so cannot be a root of .
Hence, cannot be expressed as for polynomials and in . This means that cannot be expressed as the product of two non-constant polynomials with integer coefficients.
Q.E.D.
Alternate Solution
Trivial by Perron's Criterion lol
Note: Quoting Perron's Criterion on the actual IMO will very likely result in a score in the set , since it was not a well-known result back then.
See Also
1993 IMO (Problems) • Resources | ||
Preceded by First Question |
1 • 2 • 3 • 4 • 5 • 6 | Followed by Problem 2 |
All IMO Problems and Solutions |