Difference between revisions of "Cohn's criterion"
m |
Twod horse (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Let <math>p</math> be a prime number, and <math>b\geq 2</math> an integer. If <math>\overline{p_np_{n-1}\cdots p_1p_0}</math> is the base-<math>b</math> representation of <math>p</math>, and <math>0\leq p_i<b</math>, then | Let <math>p</math> be a prime number, and <math>b\geq 2</math> an integer. If <math>\overline{p_np_{n-1}\cdots p_1p_0}</math> is the base-<math>b</math> representation of <math>p</math>, and <math>0\leq p_i<b</math>, then | ||
− | <cmath>f(x)=p_nx^n+p_{n-1}x^{n-1}+\cdots+ | + | <cmath>f(x)=p_nx^n+p_{n-1}x^{n-1}+\cdots+p_1x+p_0</cmath> |
is irreducible. | is irreducible. | ||
Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
− | + | [[Category:Algebra]] |
Revision as of 02:48, 12 February 2021
Let be a prime number, and
an integer. If
is the base-
representation of
, and
, then
is irreducible.
Proof
The following proof is due to M. Ram Murty.
We start off with a lemma. Let . Suppose
,
, and
. Then, any complex root of
,
, has a non positive real part or satisfies
.
Proof: If and Re
, note that:
This means
if
, so
.
If , this implies
if
and
. Let
. Since
, one of
and
is 1. WLOG, assume
. Let
be the roots of
. This means that
. Therefore,
is irreducible.
If , we will need to prove another lemma:
All of the zeroes of satisfy Re
.
Proof: If , then the two polynomials are
and
, both of which satisfy our constraint. For
, we get the polynomials
,
,
, and
, all of which satisfy the constraint. If
,
If Re , we have Re
, and then
For
, then
. Therefore,
is not a root of
.
However, if Re , we have from our first lemma, that
, so Re
. Thus we have proved the lemma.
To finish the proof, let . Since
, one of
and
is 1. WLOG, assume
. By our lemma,
. Thus, if
are the roots of
, then
. This is a contradiction, so
is irreducible.