How can I show that the polynomial $x-1$ is irreducible in $\mathbb{Z}_8[x]$?

$\mathbb{Z}_8[x]$ is not an integral domain so we cannot use degree considerations. I have tried reducing the problem mod 2 to conclude a factorization of $x-1$ must be of form $(1+a_1x+a_2x^2+...+a_mx^m)(1+b_1x+b_2x^2+...+b_nx^n)$ where $a_i,b_i$ are even, except $b_1$ is odd. I also tried using induction on the degrees $m,n$ but to no avail.

Any help is appreciated!

EDIT: Upon trial and error I have discovered $(2x^2-x-1)(4x^2-2x+1)=x-1$ in $\mathbb{Z}_8[x]$, however this does not disprove anything because we do not know if the 2 polynomials on the left are units or not...

  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Indeed, $4x^2-2x+1$ is a unit in $\Bbb Z_8[x]$: its reciprocal is $2x+1$. (Note that $\frac1{1+2x}=1-2x+4x^2-8x^3+16x^4\cdots=1-2x+4x^2$ in $\Bbb Z_8[x]$.) $\endgroup$ Mar 19, 2016 at 6:34
  • $\begingroup$ It had occurred to me that I have never showed x-1 to be non-unit, but that is easy: let f be its inverse, the leading term of f times the leading term of x-1 must be a term with coefficient 0, but that means the leading term of f has zero coefficient, contradiction. I'm putting this down for other's reference. $\endgroup$ Mar 19, 2016 at 9:52

2 Answers 2


Aha, together we have the necessary pieces! You've remarked (by looking modulo $2$) that any factorization of $x-1$ in $\Bbb Z_8[x]$ must look like $$ x-1 = (1-x+2f(x))(1+2g(x)). $$ However, $1+2g(x)$ is a unit, since its reciprocal is $1-2g(x)+4g(x)^2$. Therefore $x-1$ is indeed irreducible in $\Bbb Z_8[x]$.

  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Nice answer, +1. Indeed, in general, the units of $R[X]$ are polynomials $a_{0} + a_{1}X+\cdots a_{n}X^{n}$ such that $a_{0}$ is a unit, and $a_{1}, \ldots, a_{n}$ are nilpotent. (Here, $a_{0} = 1$, and every coefficient of $2g(x)$ is nilpotent, since $2$ is nilpotent.) $\endgroup$ Mar 19, 2016 at 6:47
  • $\begingroup$ That's a very neat trick! Thanks a lot! $\endgroup$ Mar 19, 2016 at 8:16

First of all I have to admit that I don't know what's an irreducible polynomial over a non-integral domain.
But if I understand well the OP wants to show that $X-1$ can't be written as a product of two non-invertible polynomials (of degree at least one).
Suppose the contrary, and write $X-1=fg$ with $\deg f\ge1$, $\deg g\ge1$.
If we work over a ring $R$ having only one prime ideal $\mathfrak p$ (as it is $\mathbb Z/8\mathbb Z$), then we arrive to a contradiction immediately: in $R/\mathfrak p$ we have $X-\overline 1=\overline f\overline g$ hence $\deg\overline f=0$ and $\deg\overline g=1$ (or vice versa). Then all coefficients of $f$, excepting $f_0$, belong to $\mathfrak p$, so they are nilpotent. But obviously $f_0$ is invertible, so $f$ is invertible.

Remark. We showed that $X-1$ is "irreducible" over any commutative ring having only one prime ideal (in particular for $\mathbb Z/p^n\mathbb Z$ with $p$ prime, $n\ge1$). One can't generalize this to commutative rings with at least two prime ideals: in $(\mathbb Z/6\mathbb Z)[X]$ we can write $X-1=(3X-1)(2X+1)$.

  • $\begingroup$ Note that this is essentially the same proof as in my answer together with Alex Wertheim's comment. This is not a derogatory statement!—just a way of helping the OP assimilate the various viewpoints on this topic. $\endgroup$ Mar 19, 2016 at 17:23
  • $\begingroup$ @GregMartin I've thought I did a little more. $\endgroup$
    – user26857
    Mar 19, 2016 at 20:28

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.