I have an assignment to extend/modify (and of course prove it) Eisenstein's criterion as follows:

Let $f(x)=\sum a_ix^i\in\mathbb{Z}[x]$ with $n\ge 2$ and let $p$ be a prime such that $p\mid a_i$ for $i=0,\ldots n-2$ but NOT for $i=n-1, n$ and $p^2\not\mid a_0$.

My first thought was that irreducible polynomials in a polynomial ring fill the role of prime numbers in the ring of integers (in some sense) and then I wondered under what condition will the sum of two primes be a prime. Now I need really special primes to have their sum as a prime. Since their parity has to be different one of them has to be $2$ and the second has to be a lower twin of a twinprime-pair. I was thinking about sums since if I define $$f_1(x)=a_nx^n+a_{n-2}x^{n-2}+\ldots+a_0$$ and $$f_2(x)=a_{n-1}x^{n-1}+a_{n-2}x^{n-2}+\ldots+a_0$$ will be irreducible polynomials by Eisenstein's irreducibility criterion (the original one) and the sum of these two will be $$f'(x)=f_1(x)+f_2(x)=a_nx^n+a_{n-1}x^{n-1}+2a_{n-2}x^{n-2}+\ldots+2a_0$$ and this looks fairly much like $f(x)$ and the $2$'s won't disturb much (this is just a bold feeling) since all these terms are already divisible by a prime namely $p$ so we could write $f'(x)$ as $$f'(x)=a_nx^n+a_{n-1}x^{n-1}+a_{n-2}'x^{n-2}+\ldots+a_0'$$ and as long as $p\neq 2$ this fulfills the criterion of the modification. And from here try to "cook up" some criteria on the $a_i's$. But I feel stuck and I don't even know whether this is a good approach or I am just wasting time. Could anyone give me some hints how to continue from here or if the approach is wrong, give me a hint how to try to tackle the problem. Thanks.

  • $\begingroup$ I suppose you mean to prove that f is irreducible. But in that case it's false: I'll leave it to you to cook up a degree-2 polynomial that factors even though its first two coefficients are odd and its constant term is even and not a multiple of 4. $\endgroup$ – John Brevik Feb 26 '15 at 17:48
  • $\begingroup$ it also follows from the very awesome theory of the newton polygon $\endgroup$ – oxeimon Feb 26 '15 at 18:55

The assertion is true for every $n \geq 2$, if you additionaly require that $f$ has no rational root (if $f$ is monic, this means no integer root, if $f$ is not monic the denominator of a rational root divides the coefficient of the leading term).

You can always construct a polynomial $x^n+(p-1)x^{n-1}-px^{n-2}+px^{n-3} - \dotsb \pm p$, which fulfills the requirements but has the root $1$, hence is reducible.

So let us further assume that $f$ has no root (in particular we only have to deal with the case $n \geq 4$).

Modulo $p$ we have $f = x^n+ax^{n-1}=x^{n-1}(x+a)$. Let $f=gh$ with $g,h$ polynomials of degree at least $2$ (since we have no roots). Modulo $p$ we have $g=x^r$ and $h = x^s(x+a)$, with $r \geq 2, s \geq 1$. We deduce $f(0) = g(0)\cdot h(0) = 0 \mod p^2$, the same contradiction as in the prove of the original criterion.

  • $\begingroup$ hey! I don't understand where $g=x^r$ and $h=x^s(x+a)$ comes from and why can we deduce a contradiction from them. Could you explain a little bit further? thanks $\endgroup$ – Vinyl_cape_jawa Mar 2 '15 at 7:52
  • $\begingroup$ This is just unique factorization in $\mathbb Z/p\mathbb Z[X]$. $\endgroup$ – MooS Mar 2 '15 at 7:57
  • $\begingroup$ I am sorry but I still don't see how unique factorization in $\mathbb{Z}_p[x]$ helps here. I mean the map $\mathbb{Z}[x]\to\mathbb{Z}_p[x]$ preserves reducibility/irreducibility when $p$ does not divide the highest coefficient but I am unsure that this works the other way around, or am I totally misunderstanding you? $\endgroup$ – Vinyl_cape_jawa Mar 2 '15 at 8:02
  • $\begingroup$ $g$ and are $h$ are some factors of degree $\geq 2$ of the polynomial $x^{n-1}(x+a)$ in $\mathbb Z/p\mathbb Z[X]$. So they obviously have the form $x^r$ and $x^s(x+a)$ for some $r$ and $s$ respectively. The lower bounds for $r,s$ just come from the fact that $g,h$ have degree at least $2$. This is the same as I would say in integers: $a$ and $b$ are factors of the number $p^n \cdot q$, hence they have the form $p^r$ and $p^sq$. $\endgroup$ – MooS Mar 2 '15 at 8:05
  • $\begingroup$ I see. But then how do we get $f(0)=g(0)h(0)$ when we reduce mod $p^2$. This whole exercise is just weird. I thought I am going to get some further assertions on the coefficients (some extra besides the ones for Eisenstein's) so it will be iredducile if ..., but I can't see this from the answer you gave, I have the feeling that I misinterpreted the question. $\endgroup$ – Vinyl_cape_jawa Mar 2 '15 at 8:18

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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