I am a little confused by the following exercise in Dummit and Foote, Exercise 14.6.31.

This is the setup of the exercise (not the statement to be proved):

Consider $f(x) = a_nx^n + \cdots + a_0$ and $g(x) = b_mx^m + \cdots + b_0$ as general polynomials and suppose the roots of $f(x)$ are $x_1,\dotsc,x_n$ and the roots of $g(x)$ are $y_1,\dotsc, y_m$. The coefficients of $f(x)$ are powers of $a_n$ times the elementary symmetric functions in $x_1,x_2,\dotsc,x_n$ and the coefficients of $g(x)$ are powers of $b_m$ times the elementary symmetric functions in $y_1,y_2,\dotsc,y_m.$

Earlier in the section, they give the definition

The general polynomial of degree $n$ is the polynomial $$(x - x_1)(x- x_2)\cdots (x-x_n)$$ whose roots are the indeterminates $x_1,x_2,\dotsc,x_n$.

I see how the general polynomial in this definition has coefficients which are elementary symmetric functions in $x_1,\dotsc,x_n$ (just by expanding the expression). I don't understand exactly what it means to consider $f(x)$ and $g(x)$ as general polynomials, since they don't seem to be general polynomials under this definition. I was guessing it meant to view the $a_i$ and $b_j$ as indeterminates and to view $f$ and $g$ as polynomials in $F(a_0,\dotsc,a_n,b_0,\dotsc,b_m)$ or something like that. But then, wouldn't $\,f$, for example, factor as $a_n(x - x_1)\cdots(x - x_n)$? Why would the coefficients of this polynomial involve powers of $a_n$ times the elementary symmetric functions in $x_1,\dotsc,x_n$ as opposed to just $a_n$ times the elementary symmetric functions?


1 Answer 1


My interpretation of this is that to view these as general polynomials, we consider the coefficients as being polynomial functions of the roots $x_1,\dots,x_n$, which are indeterminant. So we write $f(x) = a_n(x - x_1)\cdots(x - x_n)$. In which case $a_n$ is a non-zero constant and $a_0,\dots,a_{n - 1}$ are symmetric polynomials in $x_1,\dots,x_n$. You are correct that we don't need "powers of $a_n$" but rather we multiply each elementary symmetric function by $a_n$.

The writing here could be better, it seems.

  • $\begingroup$ Thank you. Just so I'm clear, you mean to view $a_i$ as an element of $F[x_1,\dotsc,x_n]$, namely, the $i$-th symmetric function in $x_1,\dots,x_n$, right? That seems like a sensible interpretation - hopefully the language they chose was a mistake! $\endgroup$ Jun 8, 2018 at 3:50
  • $\begingroup$ Correct, yes @user3075877 $\endgroup$ Jun 8, 2018 at 4:41

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.