Proving that this polynomial has no roots in this field

Multi tool use
Multi tool use

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
2
down vote

favorite












Problem: Let $k$ be a field, and let $F = k(t)$ be the field of rational functions in $t$ with coefficients in $k$. Then consider $f(x) = x^p - t in F[x]$ where $p$ is prime. Prove that $f$ is irreducible over $F$.



Attempt: I know there exists a Lemma (David Cox, Galois Theory, page 86) that says:



Lemma: Let $F$ be a field and let $p$ be prime. then $f = x^p - a in F[x]$ is irreducible over $F$ if and only if $f$ has no roots in $F$.



Hence, by the above lemma, I wish to show that $f(x) = x^p - t in F[x]$ has no roots in $F$. How can I show this? A 'root' would be a rational function in $t$ with coefficients in $k$. Let this function be denoted by $g(t)$. Then this would have to satisfy $g(t)^p = t$ in order to be a root of $f$.



I'm not sure why this is not possible. Is it because $p > 1$ is prime?







share|cite|improve this question
























    up vote
    2
    down vote

    favorite












    Problem: Let $k$ be a field, and let $F = k(t)$ be the field of rational functions in $t$ with coefficients in $k$. Then consider $f(x) = x^p - t in F[x]$ where $p$ is prime. Prove that $f$ is irreducible over $F$.



    Attempt: I know there exists a Lemma (David Cox, Galois Theory, page 86) that says:



    Lemma: Let $F$ be a field and let $p$ be prime. then $f = x^p - a in F[x]$ is irreducible over $F$ if and only if $f$ has no roots in $F$.



    Hence, by the above lemma, I wish to show that $f(x) = x^p - t in F[x]$ has no roots in $F$. How can I show this? A 'root' would be a rational function in $t$ with coefficients in $k$. Let this function be denoted by $g(t)$. Then this would have to satisfy $g(t)^p = t$ in order to be a root of $f$.



    I'm not sure why this is not possible. Is it because $p > 1$ is prime?







    share|cite|improve this question






















      up vote
      2
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      2
      down vote

      favorite











      Problem: Let $k$ be a field, and let $F = k(t)$ be the field of rational functions in $t$ with coefficients in $k$. Then consider $f(x) = x^p - t in F[x]$ where $p$ is prime. Prove that $f$ is irreducible over $F$.



      Attempt: I know there exists a Lemma (David Cox, Galois Theory, page 86) that says:



      Lemma: Let $F$ be a field and let $p$ be prime. then $f = x^p - a in F[x]$ is irreducible over $F$ if and only if $f$ has no roots in $F$.



      Hence, by the above lemma, I wish to show that $f(x) = x^p - t in F[x]$ has no roots in $F$. How can I show this? A 'root' would be a rational function in $t$ with coefficients in $k$. Let this function be denoted by $g(t)$. Then this would have to satisfy $g(t)^p = t$ in order to be a root of $f$.



      I'm not sure why this is not possible. Is it because $p > 1$ is prime?







      share|cite|improve this question












      Problem: Let $k$ be a field, and let $F = k(t)$ be the field of rational functions in $t$ with coefficients in $k$. Then consider $f(x) = x^p - t in F[x]$ where $p$ is prime. Prove that $f$ is irreducible over $F$.



      Attempt: I know there exists a Lemma (David Cox, Galois Theory, page 86) that says:



      Lemma: Let $F$ be a field and let $p$ be prime. then $f = x^p - a in F[x]$ is irreducible over $F$ if and only if $f$ has no roots in $F$.



      Hence, by the above lemma, I wish to show that $f(x) = x^p - t in F[x]$ has no roots in $F$. How can I show this? A 'root' would be a rational function in $t$ with coefficients in $k$. Let this function be denoted by $g(t)$. Then this would have to satisfy $g(t)^p = t$ in order to be a root of $f$.



      I'm not sure why this is not possible. Is it because $p > 1$ is prime?









      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Aug 29 at 10:13









      Kamil

      1,90921237




      1,90921237




















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          4
          down vote



          accepted










          As you've noticed the supposed root has to be a rational function, so we get that:



          $$g(t) = fracf(t)h(t) quad textfor some f,h in k[t]$$



          Note that $f,h$ above are polynomials in the ring of polynomials of $k$.



          The plugging it in the equation we get:



          $$left(fracf(t)h(t)right)^p - t = 0 iff f(t)^p = th(t)^p$$



          Now just compare the degrees of the polynomials. If $deg f = n$ and $deg h = m$, then we get that the LHS has degree $pn$, while the RHS has degree $pm + 1$. It's obvious this two can't be equal. Thus we obtain a contradiction.



          Hence the proof.






          share|cite|improve this answer



























            up vote
            4
            down vote













            I wouldn’t bother with the Lemma you quoted.



            The field $F$ is the fraction field of the Unique Factorization Domain $k[t]$, in which $t$ is an indecomposable element. Your polynomial is $k[t]$-irreducible by Eisenstein. So it’s $k(t)$-irreducible, by Gauss.






            share|cite|improve this answer




















              Your Answer




              StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
              return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
              StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
              StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
              );
              );
              , "mathjax-editing");

              StackExchange.ready(function()
              var channelOptions =
              tags: "".split(" "),
              id: "69"
              ;
              initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

              StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
              // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
              if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
              StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
              createEditor();
              );

              else
              createEditor();

              );

              function createEditor()
              StackExchange.prepareEditor(
              heartbeatType: 'answer',
              convertImagesToLinks: true,
              noModals: false,
              showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
              reputationToPostImages: 10,
              bindNavPrevention: true,
              postfix: "",
              noCode: true, onDemand: true,
              discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
              ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
              );



              );













               

              draft saved


              draft discarded


















              StackExchange.ready(
              function ()
              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2898195%2fproving-that-this-polynomial-has-no-roots-in-this-field%23new-answer', 'question_page');

              );

              Post as a guest






























              2 Answers
              2






              active

              oldest

              votes








              2 Answers
              2






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes








              up vote
              4
              down vote



              accepted










              As you've noticed the supposed root has to be a rational function, so we get that:



              $$g(t) = fracf(t)h(t) quad textfor some f,h in k[t]$$



              Note that $f,h$ above are polynomials in the ring of polynomials of $k$.



              The plugging it in the equation we get:



              $$left(fracf(t)h(t)right)^p - t = 0 iff f(t)^p = th(t)^p$$



              Now just compare the degrees of the polynomials. If $deg f = n$ and $deg h = m$, then we get that the LHS has degree $pn$, while the RHS has degree $pm + 1$. It's obvious this two can't be equal. Thus we obtain a contradiction.



              Hence the proof.






              share|cite|improve this answer
























                up vote
                4
                down vote



                accepted










                As you've noticed the supposed root has to be a rational function, so we get that:



                $$g(t) = fracf(t)h(t) quad textfor some f,h in k[t]$$



                Note that $f,h$ above are polynomials in the ring of polynomials of $k$.



                The plugging it in the equation we get:



                $$left(fracf(t)h(t)right)^p - t = 0 iff f(t)^p = th(t)^p$$



                Now just compare the degrees of the polynomials. If $deg f = n$ and $deg h = m$, then we get that the LHS has degree $pn$, while the RHS has degree $pm + 1$. It's obvious this two can't be equal. Thus we obtain a contradiction.



                Hence the proof.






                share|cite|improve this answer






















                  up vote
                  4
                  down vote



                  accepted







                  up vote
                  4
                  down vote



                  accepted






                  As you've noticed the supposed root has to be a rational function, so we get that:



                  $$g(t) = fracf(t)h(t) quad textfor some f,h in k[t]$$



                  Note that $f,h$ above are polynomials in the ring of polynomials of $k$.



                  The plugging it in the equation we get:



                  $$left(fracf(t)h(t)right)^p - t = 0 iff f(t)^p = th(t)^p$$



                  Now just compare the degrees of the polynomials. If $deg f = n$ and $deg h = m$, then we get that the LHS has degree $pn$, while the RHS has degree $pm + 1$. It's obvious this two can't be equal. Thus we obtain a contradiction.



                  Hence the proof.






                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  As you've noticed the supposed root has to be a rational function, so we get that:



                  $$g(t) = fracf(t)h(t) quad textfor some f,h in k[t]$$



                  Note that $f,h$ above are polynomials in the ring of polynomials of $k$.



                  The plugging it in the equation we get:



                  $$left(fracf(t)h(t)right)^p - t = 0 iff f(t)^p = th(t)^p$$



                  Now just compare the degrees of the polynomials. If $deg f = n$ and $deg h = m$, then we get that the LHS has degree $pn$, while the RHS has degree $pm + 1$. It's obvious this two can't be equal. Thus we obtain a contradiction.



                  Hence the proof.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Aug 29 at 10:52









                  Stefan4024

                  29.7k53377




                  29.7k53377




















                      up vote
                      4
                      down vote













                      I wouldn’t bother with the Lemma you quoted.



                      The field $F$ is the fraction field of the Unique Factorization Domain $k[t]$, in which $t$ is an indecomposable element. Your polynomial is $k[t]$-irreducible by Eisenstein. So it’s $k(t)$-irreducible, by Gauss.






                      share|cite|improve this answer
























                        up vote
                        4
                        down vote













                        I wouldn’t bother with the Lemma you quoted.



                        The field $F$ is the fraction field of the Unique Factorization Domain $k[t]$, in which $t$ is an indecomposable element. Your polynomial is $k[t]$-irreducible by Eisenstein. So it’s $k(t)$-irreducible, by Gauss.






                        share|cite|improve this answer






















                          up vote
                          4
                          down vote










                          up vote
                          4
                          down vote









                          I wouldn’t bother with the Lemma you quoted.



                          The field $F$ is the fraction field of the Unique Factorization Domain $k[t]$, in which $t$ is an indecomposable element. Your polynomial is $k[t]$-irreducible by Eisenstein. So it’s $k(t)$-irreducible, by Gauss.






                          share|cite|improve this answer












                          I wouldn’t bother with the Lemma you quoted.



                          The field $F$ is the fraction field of the Unique Factorization Domain $k[t]$, in which $t$ is an indecomposable element. Your polynomial is $k[t]$-irreducible by Eisenstein. So it’s $k(t)$-irreducible, by Gauss.







                          share|cite|improve this answer












                          share|cite|improve this answer



                          share|cite|improve this answer










                          answered Aug 29 at 19:12









                          Lubin

                          41.5k34284




                          41.5k34284



























                               

                              draft saved


                              draft discarded















































                               


                              draft saved


                              draft discarded














                              StackExchange.ready(
                              function ()
                              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2898195%2fproving-that-this-polynomial-has-no-roots-in-this-field%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                              );

                              Post as a guest













































































                              KXESQ9xD9Bzr96,t,gCSNvJ iPauj,oD
                              waHVfqA22UDBFCCXVVeOvRnfU,1kyoNIeE,N0hoO,E1TnrHnjfkYYDBF,im4NWGhT nt8l5 78i,y Lm0DJsSXqiF74FJTYz 3g lj

                              這個網誌中的熱門文章

                              How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

                              Propositional logic and tautologies

                              Distribution of Stopped Wiener Process with Stochastic Volatility