Polynomials Over a Field - Rotman, Lemma 3.67

In summary, the relevant text from Joseph J. Rotman's book "A First Course in Abstract Algebra with Applications (Third Edition)" is discussing the proof of Lemma 3.67, which states that if $p(x)|f(x)$ and $p(x)$ is monic, then $d(x)=p(x)$, where $d(x)$ is the monic polynomial of greatest degree that divides both $p(x)$ and $f(x)$. This follows from the fact that if a polynomial is irreducible (like $p(x)$), then its only monic divisors are $1$ and itself. In addition, if $d(x)|p(x)$ and $d(x)$ is monic, then $d(x
  • #1
Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
3,998
48
I am reading Joseph J. Rotman's book: A First Course in Abstract Algebra with Applications (Third Edition) ...

I am currently focused on Section 3.5 From Numbers to Polynomials ...

I need help with an aspect of the proof of Lemma 3.67 ...

The relevant text from Rotman's book is as follows:View attachment 4640In the proof of the above Lemma, we read the following:

" ... ... If \(\displaystyle p(x) | f(x)\), then \(\displaystyle d(x) = p(x)\), for \(\displaystyle p(x)\) is monic. ... ... "Can someone please explain how \(\displaystyle p(x) | f(x)\) and \(\displaystyle p(x)\) being monic implies that \(\displaystyle d(x) = p(x)\) ... ...

Hope someone can help ... ...

Peter*** EDIT ***

I have just realized that I do not understand how the second line of the proof works ... so if someone can also help me with that, i would appreciate it very much ...
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
$p$ is irreducible (this is like being a prime integer).

So if $d(x)|p(x)$, the ONLY things $d$ can be (if $d$ is monic) are $1$ and $p(x)$.

If $p(x)|f(x)$, then $d(x) = p(x)$, since $\text{deg}(p) > \text{deg}(1) = 0$ (remember, irreducible elements are BY DEFINITION non-units-this is why we say $1$ and $-1$ are not prime, in the integers). Remember $d$ is the monic polynomial OF GREATEST DEGREE that divides both $p$ and $f$.

On the other hand, if $p(x)\not\mid f(x)$, then $d(x) \neq p(x)$, so $d(x)$ must be $1$.
 
  • #3
Deveno said:
$p$ is irreducible (this is like being a prime integer).

So if $d(x)|p(x)$, the ONLY things $d$ can be (if $d$ is monic) are $1$ and $p(x)$.

If $p(x)|f(x)$, then $d(x) = p(x)$, since $\text{deg}(p) > \text{deg}(1) = 0$ (remember, irreducible elements are BY DEFINITION non-units-this is why we say $1$ and $-1$ are not prime, in the integers). Remember $d$ is the monic polynomial OF GREATEST DEGREE that divides both $p$ and $f$.

On the other hand, if $p(x)\not\mid f(x)$, then $d(x) \neq p(x)$, so $d(x)$ must be $1$.
Thanks Deveno ... but (apologies) I need a bit more help ...

You write:

" ... If $p(x)|f(x)$, then $d(x) = p(x)$, since $\text{deg}(p) > \text{deg}(1) = 0$..."

I am still struggling to see how this follows ... can you be more explicit as to why this follows ...

(Note: I can see that $\text{deg}(p) > \text{deg}(1) = 0$ since an irreducible in a ring is by definition not a unit ... )

Sorry to be slow on this matter ...

Peter
 
  • #4
Peter said:
Thanks Deveno ... but (apologies) I need a bit more help ...

You write:

" ... If $p(x)|f(x)$, then $d(x) = p(x)$, since $\text{deg}(p) > \text{deg}(1) = 0$..."

I am still struggling to see how this follows ... can you be more explicit as to why this follows ...

(Note: I can see that $\text{deg}(p) > \text{deg}(1) = 0$ since an irreducible in a ring is by definition not a unit ... )

Sorry to be slow on this matter ...

Peter
I do not mean to hijack this thread. but I think I can help you with this Peter.

Suppose $p(x)|f(x)$. Write $D(x)=p(x)$. Note that $D(x)$ divides both $p(x)$ and $f(x)$.

We claim that $D(x)|d(x)$. This is because we can write $d(x)=p(x)a(x)+f(x)b(x)$ for some polynomials $a(x)$ and $b(x)$.

From this we conclude that $d(x)=p(x)q(x)$ for some polynomial $q(x)$. But since $d(x)|p(x)$, we must have $q(x)=1$ (since $d(x)$ is a monic.)
 
  • #5
Deveno said:
$p$ is irreducible (this is like being a prime integer).

So if $d(x)|p(x)$, the ONLY things $d$ can be (if $d$ is monic) are $1$ and $p(x)$.

If $p(x)|f(x)$, then $d(x) = p(x)$, since $\text{deg}(p) > \text{deg}(1) = 0$ (remember, irreducible elements are BY DEFINITION non-units-this is why we say $1$ and $-1$ are not prime, in the integers). Remember $d$ is the monic polynomial OF GREATEST DEGREE that divides both $p$ and $f$.

On the other hand, if $p(x)\not\mid f(x)$, then $d(x) \neq p(x)$, so $d(x)$ must be $1$.

Hi Deveno,

I have been reflecting on what you have said and I think I now follow why if \(\displaystyle p(x) | f(x)\) it follows that \(\displaystyle d(x) = p(x)\) ...My rough reasoning is as follows:We have that \(\displaystyle d(x) = (p,f)\) ...

so that \(\displaystyle d|p\) and \(\displaystyle d|f\) ...

We also have that \(\displaystyle p(x)\) is a monic irreducible polynomial ...

Now, p irreducible implies that if \(\displaystyle p = uv\) then one of \(\displaystyle u, v\) is a unit ... take it to be \(\displaystyle u\) ...

But \(\displaystyle p\) is monic, so if the divisors of \(\displaystyle p\) are monic (as \(\displaystyle d\) is!) then \(\displaystyle u = 1\) and \(\displaystyle v = p\)

Thus the only monic divisors of p(x) are 1 and d(x)Now, suppose \(\displaystyle p(x) |f(x)\) ...

We know that \(\displaystyle p(x)\), being irreducible, is not a unit so \(\displaystyle \text{deg } p \gt 0 \) ...

But we also know that \(\displaystyle d(x) | f(x)\) and, further that \(\displaystyle d\) is the monic polynomial of greatest degree that divides both \(\displaystyle p\) and \(\displaystyle f\) ...

So, if \(\displaystyle p \neq d\) then since \(\displaystyle p|f\) and \(\displaystyle d|f\) ... we have that \(\displaystyle d\) is greater degree than \(\displaystyle p\) ... ... which cannot be true as we also have that \(\displaystyle d|p\) ...

So it must be that \(\displaystyle p = d\) ...
Can you please confirm that my reasoning is OK ... ... or alternatively, point out deficiencies or errors ...

Peter
 
  • #6
caffeinemachine said:
I do not mean to hijack this thread. but I think I can help you with this Peter.

Suppose $p(x)|f(x)$. Write $D(x)=p(x)$. Note that $D(x)$ divides both $p(x)$ and $f(x)$.

We claim that $D(x)|d(x)$. This is because we can write $d(x)=p(x)a(x)+f(x)b(x)$ for some polynomials $a(x)$ and $b(x)$.

From this we conclude that $d(x)=p(x)q(x)$ for some polynomial $q(x)$. But since $d(x)|p(x)$, we must have $q(x)=1$ (since $d(x)$ is a monic.)
Hi caffeinemachine,

Thanks for your help ... most welcome ...... Yes follow that $d(x)=p(x)q(x)$ for some polynomial $q(x)$ ...

But do not quite see how \(\displaystyle d(x)\) being monic and $d(x)|p(x)$ mean that $q(x)=1$ ...

Can you help?

Peter
 
  • #7
Peter said:
Hi caffeinemachine,

Thanks for your help ... most welcome ...... Yes follow that $d(x)=p(x)q(x)$ for some polynomial $q(x)$ ...

But do not quite see how \(\displaystyle d(x)\) being monic and $d(x)|p(x)$ mean that $q(x)=1$ ...

Can you help?

Peter
Since $d(x)|p(x)$, we know there is a polynomial $a(x)$ such that $d(x)a(x)=p(x)$, which gives $p(x)q(x)a(x)=p(x)$. This leads to $q(x)a(x)=1$. Thus $q(x)$ must be a constant polynomial. Now since $d(x)$ is moinc we must have $q(x)=1$/
 

FAQ: Polynomials Over a Field - Rotman, Lemma 3.67

What is the definition of a polynomial over a field?

A polynomial over a field is an expression of the form f(x) = anxn + an-1xn-1 + ... + a1x + a0, where x is a variable, ai are coefficients from the field, and n is a non-negative integer.

What is the degree of a polynomial over a field?

The degree of a polynomial over a field is the highest power of x in the polynomial. It is denoted by deg(f).

How do you add two polynomials over a field?

To add two polynomials over a field, simply add the coefficients of the same degree terms and keep the coefficients of different degree terms unchanged.

What is the difference between a polynomial over a field and a polynomial over a ring?

The main difference is that the coefficients in a polynomial over a field must come from the field, whereas in a polynomial over a ring, the coefficients can come from any ring, not necessarily a field.

Can a polynomial over a field have more than one variable?

No, a polynomial over a field can only have one variable. However, it can have multiple terms with different powers of the variable.

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top