Conjecture :

Let $p$ be a prime number , $f\in \mathbb Z[X]$ an irreducible polynomial with degree $p$ and coefficients in the range $[-1,1]$. Then the galois group of $f$ over $\mathbb Q$ is $S_p$

Can anyone prove or disprove this conjecture ?

The conjecture is true for the primes upto $p=11$. To prove the conjecture it would be sufficient to prove that the galois group of $f$ over $\mathbb Q$ contains a transposition, which is surely the case if there are exactly two non-real roots. But in general, I do not know how this can be shown.

  • $\begingroup$ Do you mean range as in analysis (i.e. the integers $-1,0,1$), or as set $\{-1,1\}$? $\endgroup$ – ahulpke Feb 9 '16 at 3:35
  • $\begingroup$ How did you prove that this is true until $p=11$? If you can describe your methods, perhaps that would throw some light on why it might be true in general. $\endgroup$ – Prahlad Vaidyanathan Feb 9 '16 at 11:05
  • $\begingroup$ @ahulpke The coefficients are $-1$ , $0$ or $1$. $\endgroup$ – Peter Feb 9 '16 at 12:26
  • $\begingroup$ @PrahladVaidyanathan I did not prove it by hand, I simply checked all polynomials with PARI/GP. I wanted to doublecheck it with GAP, but I aborted the calculation for $p=11$ because GAP is very slow in checking whether a polynomial is irreducible and determining the galois group. This is the reason, I did not check the case $p=13$ (which is impossible in PARI/GP, which is limitied to degree $11$). $\endgroup$ – Peter Feb 9 '16 at 12:28

This is not really a full solution, but it is a bit to unwieldy to put in as a comment:

The property you are conjecturing - Galois group $S_n$ - is known to be very likely. Thus experimental data for small $p$ is not really that convincing.

(Should you want to try degrees larger than 11 in GAP, you might want to look at ProbabilityShapes-- PARI is faster as it does not strictly prove the Galois group type either.)

You cannot expect complex conjugation to have a particularly nice shape. Indeed random examples in degree 17 find a varying number of real roots.

My (maybe naive) guess on a best shot towards proving it is: Prove that the discriminant is not a square. If so (by a classification of transitive groups of prime degree -- e.g. Guralnick's work) the Galois group is either $S_n$ or contained in $AGL_1(p)$. To exclude the latter choice show that there is an element that has at least two fixed points -- i.e. by showing that there must be a prime (not dividing the discriminant) modulo which the polynomial has at least 2 roots but does not split into linear factors.

  • $\begingroup$ PARI does not prove the galois-group-type ? For which degrees is this the case ? $\endgroup$ – Peter Feb 9 '16 at 16:04
  • $\begingroup$ @Peter To the best of my knowledge PARI uses numerical approximations of the roots to determine the Galois group but does not prove that no rounding errors happen. I think the chance of an error is negligibly small, but so it is for ProbabilityShapes in GAP versus the proven GaloisType. $\endgroup$ – ahulpke Feb 9 '16 at 16:15

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.