5
$\begingroup$

I want to prove basic results of cyclotomic polynomials over $\mathbb{Q}$.

$(1)\ \Phi_n(0)=1$ for all $n>1$.

$(2)\ \Phi_{2n}(x)=\Phi_n(-x)$ for all odd numbers $n>1$.

I want use this result as definition: For every positive integer $n$,

$$ x^{n}-1=\prod_{d|n} \Phi_{d}(x)$$

where $d$ runs over all positive divisors of $n$.

$\endgroup$

3 Answers 3

10
$\begingroup$

1. Remark that $n=1$ is an exception, since $\Phi_1(0) = -1$. Since $x^n-1 = \prod_{d \mid n} \Phi_d(x)$, putting $x=0$ on both sides yields $$-1 = \prod_{d\mid n} \Phi_d(0).$$ Now use induction on $n$, and the fact that $\Phi_1(0)$ accounts for a factor of $-1$ on the right-hand side.


2. Remark that $n=1$ is again an exception, because $\Phi_2(x) = x+1 = -\Phi_1(-x)$. Now, for a general odd $n$,

$$\prod_{d \mid 2n} \Phi_d(x) =x^{2n}-1 = (x^n-1)(x^n+1) = -(x^n-1)((-x)^n-1) = -\prod_{d \mid n} \Phi_d(x)\Phi_d(-x).$$

Now we use induction on $n$. The divisors of $2n$ come in pairs $(d, 2d)$, where $d$ is a divisor of $n$. By the induction hypothesis, $\Phi_{2d}(x) = \Phi_d(-x)$ for each proper divisor of $n$, except when $n=1$ when there is an extra minus sign. By comparing both sides it follows that $\Phi_{2n}(x) = \Phi_n(-x)$.

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ in the right hand side(last term) how can i get $\Phi_{n}(-x)$?i had done induction but i get two times product on divisors. $\endgroup$ Nov 2, 2013 at 5:22
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @SiddhantTrivedi The right-hand side can be written as $-\Phi_n(x)\Phi_n(-x) \prod_d \Phi_n(d)\Phi_n(-d)$ where the product is over the proper divisors of $n$. The left-hand side can be written as $\Phi_n(x)\Phi_{2n}(x) \prod_d \Phi_d(x)\Phi_{2d}(x)$, where the product is also over the proper divisors of $n$. Now apply induction... $\endgroup$ Nov 2, 2013 at 5:31
  • $\begingroup$ very nice, thanks Bruno! $\endgroup$ Feb 2, 2014 at 19:41
  • $\begingroup$ My pleasure, @1LiterTears ! $\endgroup$ Feb 3, 2014 at 1:44
  • $\begingroup$ @BrunoJoyal For second part i have done in exactly same way but i ended up with $Φ_{2n}(x)=−Φ_n(x)$.. I guess you also got the same thing....i do not know how could you get rid off that negative sign.. :( :( $\endgroup$
    – user87543
    Nov 1, 2014 at 7:45
4
$\begingroup$

Here is another answer that uses the basic definition $$\Phi_n(x) = \prod_{1\le k\le n \atop \gcd(k,n)=1} (x-e^{2\pi i k/n}).$$ This gives $$\Phi_n(0) = (-1)^{\varphi(n)} \prod_{1\le k\le n \atop \gcd(k,n)=1} e^{2\pi i k/n}.$$ Now recall that for $n>1$ we have $$\sum_{1\le k\le n \atop \gcd(k,n)=1} k = \frac{1}{2} \varphi(n) n.$$ This gives $$\Phi_n(0) = (-1)^{\varphi(n)} e^{(2\pi i/n) \times 1/2\times \varphi(n) \times n} = (-1)^{\varphi(n)} e^{\pi i \varphi(n)} = (-1)^{2\varphi(n)} =1.$$

For the second part we get that $$\Phi_n(-x) = \prod_{1\le k\le n \atop \gcd(k,n)=1} (-x-e^{2\pi i k/n}) = (-1)^{\varphi(n)} \prod_{1\le k\le n \atop \gcd(k,n)=1} (x+e^{2\pi i k/n}) \\ = (-1)^{\varphi(n)} \prod_{1\le k\le n \atop \gcd(k,n)=1} (x-e^{\pi i + 2\pi i k/n})= (-1)^{\varphi(n)} \prod_{1\le k\le n \atop \gcd(k,n)=1} (x-e^{2\pi i (k/n+1/2)})\\ = (-1)^{\varphi(n)} \prod_{1\le k\le n \atop \gcd(k,n)=1} (x-e^{2\pi i (2k+n)/(2n)}).$$ This almost concludes the proof. We can ignore the sign because $\varphi(n)$ is even.

We now claim there is a bijection between the primitive roots modulo $2n$ call them of class $\mathcal{P}_1$ given by $e^{2\pi i k/(2n)}$ where $\gcd(k,2n)=1$ and $1\le k\le 2n$ and the values produced by $e^{2\pi i (2k+n)/(2n)}$ call them of class $\mathcal{P}_2$ where $\gcd(k,n)=1$ and $1\le k\le n.$ (These two conditions will be our domain of $k.$)

Let $\mathcal{Q}$ be the class of primitive roots modulo $n$. The $\mathcal{P}_1$ roots can be obtained from these by taking $q$ as is if it is odd and taking $q+n$ if it is even (recall that $n$ is odd). Now to establish a bijection to $\mathcal{P}_2$ we must show that $q\equiv 2k+n\bmod (2n)$ and $q+n\equiv 2k+n\bmod (2n)$ always have a unique solution $k$ in the domain of $k$. In the first case we take $k=(q+n)/2$ which is easily seen to be in this domain. In the second case take $k=q/2,$ also clearly in this domain. Moreover we clearly hit each value of $k$ exactly once. This finishes the proof.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ for $n>1$ how can i prove this? $$\sum_{1\le k\le n \atop \gcd(k,n)=1} k = \frac{1}{2} \varphi(n) n.$$ $\endgroup$ Nov 2, 2013 at 5:29
  • $\begingroup$ I got it.Thanks. $\endgroup$ Nov 2, 2013 at 6:19
2
$\begingroup$

The OP does not say what additional information may be used, so here are two answers that use Möbius inversion as in $$\Phi_n(x) = \prod_{d|n} (x^d-1)^{\mu(n/d)}$$ since this is a instant consequence of the formula you were given to work with.

Using this formula we have immediately that $$\Phi_n(0) = \prod_{d|n} (-1)^{\mu(n/d)} = (-1)^{\sum_{d|n} \mu(n/d)}.$$ Now for $n>1$ we have $\sum_{d|n} \mu(n/d) = 0$, and hence $\Phi_n(0) = (-1)^0 = 1.$ For $n=1$ we get $\Phi_1(0) = (-1)^1 = -1.$ For the second part start with $$\Phi_n(-x) = \prod_{d|n} ((-x)^d-1)^{\mu(n/d)}.$$ Now since $d$ is odd we have $(-x)^d = (-1)^d x^d = -x^d$, giving $$ \prod_{d|n} (-x^d-1)^{\mu(n/d)} = \prod_{d|n} \left(\frac{x^{2d}-1}{-x^d+1}\right)^{\mu(n/d)} = \prod_{d|n} (-1)^{\mu(n/d)} \prod_{d|n} \left(\frac{x^{2d}-1}{x^d-1}\right)^{\mu(n/d)}\\ = \prod_{d|n} (-1)^{\mu(n/d)} \prod_{d|n} \left(\frac{x^d-1}{x^{2d}-1}\right)^{\mu(2n/d)} \\= \prod_{d|n} (-1)^{\mu(n/d)} \prod_{d|n} \left(\frac{x^d-1}{x^{2d}-1}\right)^{\mu(2n/d)} \prod_{d|n} \left(\frac{x^{2d}-1}{x^{2d}-1}\right)^{\mu(2n/d/2)}\\ = \Phi_{2n}(x) \prod_{d|n} (-1)^{\mu(n/d)} \prod_{d|n} \frac{1}{(x^{2d}-1)^{\mu(2n/d)}(x^{2d}-1)^{\mu(n/d)}}\\ = \Phi_{2n}(x) \prod_{d|n} (-1)^{\mu(n/d)} \prod_{d|n} \frac{1}{(x^{2d}-1)^{\mu(2n/d)+\mu(n/d)}}.$$ Now since $n>1$ we have $\prod_{d|n} (-1)^{\mu(n/d)}=1$ and $\mu(2n/d)+\mu(n/d)=0$ so that the final answer is $$ \Phi_{2n}(x) \times 1 \times \prod_{d|n} \frac{1}{(x^{2d}-1)^0} = \Phi_{2n}(x).$$

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ In the 2nd proof how to get 3rd setp?(in the power you changed $\mu(2n/d)$) $\endgroup$ Nov 2, 2013 at 6:32
  • $\begingroup$ What a proof!really great. $\endgroup$ Nov 2, 2013 at 7:33
  • $\begingroup$ Can u give me any proof of first formula? or any link for this. $\endgroup$ Nov 2, 2013 at 7:36

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.