2
$\begingroup$

I have this definition

A field $F$ is perfect if it has characteristic $0$ or if it has characteristic $p$ and $F^p = F$

From Wikipedia, I have this fact about separable polynomials:

Irreducible polynomials over perfect fields are separable.

I can show that if $p(x)$ is irreducible and $char(F) = 0$, then $p$ cannot have multiple zeros, i.e. it's separable. I can also show that, if $p(x)$ has multiple zeros, it has to be of the form $p(x) = q(x^p)$.

Now my question:

In the comment on Wikipedia, how does the second part follow? That is, that if $char(F)=p$ for $p$ prime and $f(x)$ is irreducible over $F$ then it cannot have multiple zeros?

Many thanks for your help.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ You know two things: p(x) = q(x^p) and every element of F is a pth power. Can you combine those two things? $\endgroup$ – Qiaochu Yuan Feb 15 '11 at 9:51
3
$\begingroup$

I'm expanding on this answer in response to a comment.

We'll use the following theorem: $f \in F[x]$ has a multiple root in some extension $E$ of $F$ if and only if $f$ and $f^\prime$ have a common factor $d(x) \in F[x]$ of positive degree.

First, let $char(F) = 0$ and let $a_0 + a_1 x + \dots + a_n x^nf \in F[x]$ be irreducible over $F$. We prove by contradiction that $f$ cannot have a multiple root. So, assume $f$ has a multiple root. Then $f$ and $f^\prime$ have a common factor $d(x) \in F[x]$ of positive degree. $f$ is irreducible so the only divisor of positive degree is $f$ itself, so that $f$ divides $f^\prime$. A polynomial cannot divide a polynomial of smaller degree hence $f^\prime = 0$. But this means that $a_1 = 2 a_2 = \dots = n a_n = 0$. Since $char(F) = 0$ we get $a_k = 0$ and therefore $f = a_0$ which is not irreducible.

If $F$ has characteristic $p$ then $(x + y)^p = x^p + y^p$. Then if $f(x) = g(x^p)$ with coefficients in $F$ and $F^p = F$ then $f(x) = a_n^px^{pn} + \dots + a_0^p = (a_nx^n \dots + a_0)^p = g(x)^p$ because all $a_i \in F$ can be written as powers of $p$ by assumption. But then by assumption $f$ is irreducible over $F$ therefore contradiction.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ @MattN.Hi. I am working on the same issue. Maybe you would help me with the math logic here. The lemma I was looking at stipulates that (as you mention) $f$ is irreducible. So I see the contradiction. What I am stuck on is, that being so, how do you get distinct roots in the case where $x$ -> $x^p$? Thanks. $\endgroup$ – user12802 May 29 '12 at 17:47
  • $\begingroup$ @Andrew I can't be of help tonight so I posted your comment in chat. Let's hope someone can help. If not, I'll be back tomorrow. If it's urgent you might want to post a question. $\endgroup$ – Rudy the Reindeer May 29 '12 at 18:15
  • $\begingroup$ @MattN.Thanks. I'll check or see you tomorrow. $\endgroup$ – user12802 May 29 '12 at 18:43
  • $\begingroup$ @MattN.Found this googling. I think it will do it - have to work on understanding it. PERFECT FIELDS Characteristic 0 fields have a very handy feature ... $\endgroup$ – user12802 May 29 '12 at 19:21
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Andrew The proof for a field $F$ of characteristic $p$ goes like this: assume there is an irreducible polynomial with multiple roots. Then we can produce a contradiction. Hence there cannot be any irreducible polynomials with multiple roots in a field of prime characteristic. $\endgroup$ – Rudy the Reindeer May 30 '12 at 12:06

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.