Suppose that $a_1,a_2, \cdots, a_n$ are $n$ different integers. Then $[(x-a_1)(x-a_2) \cdots (x-a_n)]^2 +1$ is irreducible over $\mathbb Q$.

I've no idea why it is true. Thanks very much.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ It is a conjecture that if $g(x)$ is monic with $m$ distinct integer roots and $f(x) = x^{2^n} + 1$, then $f \circ g(x)$ is irreducible over $\mathbb{Q}$ with exceptions $n = 0$, $m \leq 4$. I know that a proof, for $n = 1$, is contained in Pólya and Szegő's book that can be found here. $\endgroup$
    – J.H.
    Mar 1, 2013 at 7:11
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If the given polynomial is a product $f(x)g(x), f,g\in\mathbb{Z}[x]$, then we must have $(x-a_1)(x-a_2)\cdots (x-a_n)\mid f(x)-g(x)$, but I can't take that anywhere. $\endgroup$ Mar 1, 2013 at 7:29
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @JyrkiLahtonen if $f(x)$ is reducible over $\mathbb Q$ then $f(x)$ is reducible over $\mathbb Z$ if i take the contra-positive of the above statement which imples $f(x)$ is irreducible over $\mathbb Z$ then $f(x)$ is irreducible over $\mathbb Q$ is int this helpful? $\endgroup$
    – jim
    Mar 1, 2013 at 7:34
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @jim: I already used that bit to get to this point. Sorry about not making it clear that this applies to factors in $\mathbb{Q}[x]$ (normalized to be monic) as well. $\endgroup$ Mar 1, 2013 at 7:37
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ To add to my comment above, this is conjecture due to Schur. More information can be found here. In particular, Brauer et al. provided a proof for the cases $n = 1,2$. $\endgroup$
    – J.H.
    Mar 1, 2013 at 7:47

1 Answer 1


This is an old (1909) result of Issai Schur which can be found in Pólya-Szegő , on page 133 of Volume 1 . Here is the proof of irreducibility:

Let $f(x)=(x-a_1)^2(x-a_2)^2 \cdots (x-a_n)^2 +1$ be your polynomial and suppose it factors non-trivially as $f(x)=g(x)h(x)$ over $\mathbb Q$.
By Gauss's lemma we may assume that $g,h$ are monic with integral coefficients: $$g(x)=x^k+b_{k-1}x^{k - 1}+\cdots+b_0,\;h(x)=x^l+c_{l-1}x^{l-1}+\cdots+c_0\in \mathbb Z[x] $$ Notice that the polynomial functions functions $g,h$ satisfy $g(r),h(r)\gt 0$ for $r\in \mathbb R$ and that $g(a_i)=h(a_i)=1$ .
We may assume $k\leq l $, so that $k\leq n$ since $k+l=2n$, and then we distinguish two cases:

Case 1: $k\lt l$
Then the polynomial $g$ takes the value $1$ for the $n$ distinct values $a_1,\cdots a_n$ and, because it has degree $k\lt n$, that polynomial is the constant $g=1$ and the factorization $f=gh$ is trivial, contrary to our assumption .

Case 2: $k=l=n$
Then $g-h$ is a polynomial of degree $\lt n$ vanishing at the $n$ numbers $a_i$, so that $g-h=0$ and $g=h$.
Hence the assumed factorization $f=gh$ becomes $f(x)=(x-a_1)^2(x-a_2)^2 \cdots (x-a_n)^2+1 =g(x)^2$ and we get $ 1= g(x)^2-(x-a_1)^2(x-a_2)^2 \cdots (x-a_n)^2$ so that $$1=[g(x)+(x-a_1)(x-a_2) \cdots (x-a_n)][g(x)-(x-a_1)(x-a_2) \cdots (x-a_n)]$$ This is a clearly absurd factorization of $1$ into positive degree polynomials.

In both cases the supposed non-trivial factorizability of $f$ leads to a contradiction and thus $f$ is actually irreducible.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ +1: The bit that I seem to have missed was that $f$ has no real zeros. Consequently neither do $g$ and $h$, and I can stop worrying about the possibility that $g(a_i)$, $1\le i\le n$, are a mixture of $\pm1$:s :-) $\endgroup$ Mar 1, 2013 at 9:16
  • $\begingroup$ Dear @Jyrki, I'm very happy if I helped you stop worrying :-) $\endgroup$ Mar 1, 2013 at 9:25
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Nice answer! An alternative way to render case 2 absurd is to note that $g+h$ is a polynomial of degree $n>0$, whose derivative, which is of degree $n-1$, has at least $n$ zeros (use that $f'(a_i)=0$ and the product rule). But this is clearly impossible. $\endgroup$ Jun 19, 2015 at 10:56

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.