Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Suppose that $a_1,a_2, \cdots, a_n$ are $n$ different integers. Then $[(x-a_1)(x-a_2) \cdots (x-a_n)]^2 +1$ is irreducible over $\mathbb Q$.

I've no idea why it is true. Thanks very much.

share|improve this question
    
It is a conjecture that if $g(x)$ is monic with $m$ distinct integer roots and $f(x) = x^{2^n} + 1$, then $f \circ g(x)$ is irreducible over $\mathbb{Q}$ with exceptions $n = 0$, $m \leq 4$. I know that a proof, for $n = 1$, is contained in Pólya and Szegő's book that can be found here. –  J.H. Mar 1 '13 at 7:11
    
If the given polynomial is a product $f(x)g(x), f,g\in\mathbb{Z}[x]$, then we must have $(x-a_1)(x-a_2)\cdots (x-a_n)\mid f(x)-g(x)$, but I can't take that anywhere. –  Jyrki Lahtonen Mar 1 '13 at 7:29
    
@JyrkiLahtonen if $f(x)$ is reducible over $\mathbb Q$ then $f(x)$ is reducible over $\mathbb Z$ if i take the contra-positive of the above statement which imples $f(x)$ is irreducible over $\mathbb Z$ then $f(x)$ is irreducible over $\mathbb Q$ is int this helpful? –  jim Mar 1 '13 at 7:34
    
@jim: I already used that bit to get to this point. Sorry about not making it clear that this applies to factors in $\mathbb{Q}[x]$ (normalized to be monic) as well. –  Jyrki Lahtonen Mar 1 '13 at 7:37
    
To add to my comment above, this is conjecture due to Schur. More information can be found here. In particular, Brauer et al. provided a proof for the cases $n = 1,2$. –  J.H. Mar 1 '13 at 7:47

1 Answer 1

up vote 16 down vote accepted

This is an old (1909) result of Issai Schur which can be found in Pólya-Szegő , on page 133 of Volume 1 . Here is the proof of irreducibility:

Let $f(x)=(x-a_1)^2(x-a_2)^2 \cdots (x-a_n)^2 +1$ be your polynomial and suppose it factors non-trivially as $f(x)=g(x)h(x)$ over $\mathbb Q$.
By Gauss's lemma we may assume that $g,h$ are monic with integral coefficients: $$g(x)=x^k+b_{k-1}+\cdots+b_0,\;h(x)=x^l+c_{l-1}x^{l-1}+\cdots+c_0\in \mathbb Z[x] $$ Notice that the polynomial functions functions $g,h$ satisfy $g(r),h(r)\gt 0$ for $r\in \mathbb R$ and that $g(a_i)=h(a_i)=1$ .
We may assume $k\leq l $, so that $k\leq n$ since $k+l=2n$, and then we distinguish two cases:

Case 1: $k\lt l$
Then the polynomial $g$ takes the value $1$ for the $n$ distinct values $a_1,\cdots a_n$ and, because it has degree $k\lt n$, that polynomial is the constant $g=1$ and the factorization $f=gh$ is trivial, contrary to our assumption .

Case 2: $k=l=n$
Then $g-h$ is a polynomial of degree $\lt n$ vanishing at the $n$ numbers $a_i$, so that $g-h=0$ and $g=h$.
Hence the assumed factorization $f=gh$ becomes $f(x)=(x-a_1)^2(x-a_2)^2 \cdots (x-a_n)^2+1 =g(x)^2$ and we get $ 1= g(x)^2-(x-a_1)^2(x-a_2)^2 \cdots (x-a_n)^2$ so that $$1=[g(x)+(x-a_1)(x-a_2) \cdots (x-a_n)][g(x)-(x-a_1)(x-a_2) \cdots (x-a_n)]$$ This is a clearly absurd factorization of $1$ into positive degree polynomials.

Conclusion
In both cases the supposed non-trivial factorizability of $f$ leads to a contradiction and thus $f$ is actually irreducible.

share|improve this answer
1  
+1: The bit that I seem to have missed was that $f$ has no real zeros. Consequently neither do $g$ and $h$, and I can stop worrying about the possibility that $g(a_i)$, $1\le i\le n$, are a mixture of $\pm1$:s :-) –  Jyrki Lahtonen Mar 1 '13 at 9:16
    
Dear @Jyrki, I'm very happy if I helped you stop worrying :-) –  Georges Elencwajg Mar 1 '13 at 9:25

Your Answer

 
discard

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.