Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

This is an exercise for the book Abstract Algebra by Dummit and Foote (pg. 519): show $x^{5}-ax-1\in\mathbb{Z}[x]$ is irreducible for $a\neq-1,0,2$

I need help with this exercise, I don't have an idea on how to prove there are no quadratic factors for $a\neq-1,0,2$ (for $a=-1$ there is a quadratic factor).

share|cite|improve this question
Irreducible over $\mathbb{Q}$ or just the integers? – Bombyx mori Sep 9 '12 at 15:43
Actually, in this case the irreductibility over $\mathbb{Q}$ is equivalent to the irreductibility over $\mathbb{Z}$, by Gauss' theorem. – Radu Titiu Sep 9 '12 at 15:51
@user32240 - by gauss lemma a factorization over $\mathbb{Q}$ yeild a factorization over $\mathbb{Z}$ – Belgi Sep 9 '12 at 15:52
@Belgi: I see. Thanks for reminding. – Bombyx mori Sep 9 '12 at 15:57
It might not be pretty, and it might not lead to an answer, but I would just assume there was a factorization $(xp(x) + 1)(xq(x) -1)$, write out the four different possibilities of the degree of the monic polynomials $p$ and $q$, assume the quadratic, cubic and quartic terms vanish, and see what the linear term must be. – Arthur Sep 9 '12 at 16:07
up vote 2 down vote accepted

Let $P=X^5-aX-1$. If $P$ had a rational root $\frac{p}{q}$ with $p$ and $q$ coprime, we would deduce $p^5-apq^4-q^5=0$. Then $p$ divides $p^5-apq^4$, we see that $p$ divides $q^5$. By iterating Gauss' lemma, $p$ divides $q^4,q^3,q^2$ etc and finally $p$ divides $1$, so $p=\pm 1$. Similarly $q$ divides $p^5$ so $q=\pm 1$. So the only rational roots possible are $-1$ (corresponding to $a=2$) and $1$ (corresponding to $a=0$). So $P$ has no degree $1$ factors.

So all we've left to show is that there is no factor of degree $2$. So assume $P=UV$, with $U,V \in {\mathbb Z}[X]$ and ${\sf deg}(U)=3, {\sf deg}(V)=2$. Since $P$ is unitary, $U$ and $V$ are unitary also (we replace them by their opposites if necessary).

Write $U=X^3+u_2X^2+u_1X+u_0$ and $V=X^2+v_1X+v_0$. Then,

$$ P=UV=X^5+(u_2+v_1)X^4+(u_2v_1+u_1+v_0)X^3+(u_2v_0+u_1v_1+u_0)X^2+(u_1v_0+u_0v_1)X+u_0v_0 $$ Identifying the coefficients in $X^4,X^3,X^2$, we express $u_0,u_1,u_2$ in terms of the other coefficients : $$ u_2=-v_1,u_1=v_1^2-v_0,u_0=2v_0v_1-v_1^3 $$ Then the product $UV$ becomes $$ UV=X^5-(v_1^4-3v_0v_1^2+v_0^2)X+(2v_0^2v_1-v_0v_1^3) $$ The constant coefficient can be factorized as $v_0v_1(2v_0-v_1^2)$. So $v_0,v_1$ and $2v_0-v_1^2$ must all be equal to $1$ or $-1$. So necessarily $v_0=1,v_1=-1$, and hence $U=X^3+X^2-1,V=X^2-X+1,a=-1$.

share|cite|improve this answer

This exercice is corrected here (example [8]):

share|cite|improve this answer

Here's a messy answer; they probably wanted something nicer. Any putative factorization looks like $$ x^5 - ax - 1 = (x^2 + Bx \pm 1)(x^3 + Dx^2 + Ex \mp 1) $$ In the case that the first sign is $+$ and the second is $-$, we get the four equations $$ B + D = 0 $$ $$ E + BD + 1 = 0 $$ $$ -1 + BE + D = 0 $$ $$ -B + E = a $$ Adding the second two equations together gives $(B+1)(D+E) = 0$. If $B = -1$ then $D = 1$ and $E = 0$, so $a = -1$. Else $D = -E$, and then the first and last equation together give $a = 0$.

In the case that the first sign is $-$, the equations are

$$ B + D = 0 $$ $$ E + BD - 1 = 0 $$ $$ 1 + BE - D = 0 $$ $$ B - E = a $$ Suppose $D$ is positive. Then $B$ is negative (first equation) and so $E$ is positive and greater than $D$. Then equation three is contradicted. So $D$ is negative and $B$ is positive, so $E$ is positive by equation 2; this also contradicts equation 3.

share|cite|improve this answer
(there's roughly a 70% chance of a mistake in there as I was free-writing without editing, please feel free to edit and fix the argument.) – user29743 Sep 9 '12 at 16:15
I think you missed two possibilities, namely $(x^4 + Bx^3 + Cx^2 + Dx \pm 1)(x \mp 1)$. – Arthur Sep 9 '12 at 16:20
The OP has already dealt with the case where there is a linear factor (otherwise, I agree, those would need to be treated separately). – user29743 Sep 9 '12 at 16:26

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.