Prove that $p(x) = alpha (x)f(x) + beta (x)g(x)$ for some irreducible $f(x)$, $g(x)$.Determine the irreducible polynomial for $alpha=sqrt3+sqrt5$ over $mathbbQ(sqrt10)$Prove that $k(alpha+beta)=k(alpha,beta)$Prove that $Bbb Z_2(alpha)=Bbb Z_2(beta)$ .$[K(beta):K] degf_i = [K(alpha): K] degg_i$Show that $F(alpha)=F(beta)$ if $alpha$ and $beta$ are roots of the same irreducible polynomialWhen does $[Bbb Q(alpha,beta):Bbb Q]=[Bbb Q(alpha):Bbb Q][Bbb Q(beta):Bbb Q]$Show that $F [alpha,beta]$ is a field if $alpha$ and $beta$ are algebraic over $F$.Isomorphism between two extensions $Bbb F_2(alpha)$ and $Bbb F_2(beta)$A field with an irreducible, separable polynomial with roots $alpha$ and $alpha + 1$ must have positive characteristic.If $f_K(alpha)^betabig| f_K^beta$, then $degleft(f_K(alpha)^betaright)| degleft(f_K^betaright)$?

Finding algorithms of QGIS commands?

How do you like my writing?

Peter's Strange Word

A three room house but a three headED dog

PTIJ: How can I halachically kill a vampire?

How did Alan Turing break the enigma code using the hint given by the lady in the bar?

How strictly should I take "Candidates must be local"?

How do I deal with a powergamer in a game full of beginners in a school club?

Things to avoid when using voltage regulators?

Solving "Resistance between two nodes on a grid" problem in Mathematica

Placing subfig vertically

What is the likely impact of grounding an entire aircraft series?

Good for you! in Russian

PTIJ: Why can't I eat anything?

Rejected in 4th interview round citing insufficient years of experience

How do I locate a classical quotation?

Built-In Shelves/Bookcases - IKEA vs Built

Why does the negative sign arise in this thermodynamic relation?

Offered promotion but I'm leaving. Should I tell?

Subset counting for even numbers

Making a sword in the stone, in a medieval world without magic

Do Bugbears' arms literally get longer when it's their turn?

How much attack damage does the AC boost from a shield prevent on average?

Am I not good enough for you?



Prove that $p(x) = alpha (x)f(x) + beta (x)g(x)$ for some irreducible $f(x)$, $g(x)$.


Determine the irreducible polynomial for $alpha=sqrt3+sqrt5$ over $mathbbQ(sqrt10)$Prove that $k(alpha+beta)=k(alpha,beta)$Prove that $Bbb Z_2(alpha)=Bbb Z_2(beta)$ .$[K(beta):K] degf_i = [K(alpha): K] degg_i$Show that $F(alpha)=F(beta)$ if $alpha$ and $beta$ are roots of the same irreducible polynomialWhen does $[Bbb Q(alpha,beta):Bbb Q]=[Bbb Q(alpha):Bbb Q][Bbb Q(beta):Bbb Q]$Show that $F [alpha,beta]$ is a field if $alpha$ and $beta$ are algebraic over $F$.Isomorphism between two extensions $Bbb F_2(alpha)$ and $Bbb F_2(beta)$A field with an irreducible, separable polynomial with roots $alpha$ and $alpha + 1$ must have positive characteristic.If $f_K(alpha)^betabig| f_K^beta$, then $degleft(f_K(alpha)^betaright)| degleft(f_K^betaright)$?













0












$begingroup$


Let $f(x)$ and $g(x)$ be irreducible polynomials of different degrees in field $F[x]$. Prove that for all $p(x) in F[x]$ that there exists some $alpha(x), beta(x)in F[x]$ such that $p(x) = alpha (x)f(x) + beta (x)g(x).$



I think I have a legitimate proof for this, however I would like to check my thinking.



First, $f(x)$ and $g(x)$ are irreducible and have different degrees, then they are the polynomial equivalent to relatively prime numbers and therefore have a GCD of 1. I did use my definition about irreducible polynomials from the text, but just want to soldify thinking with something I'm already comfortable with.



Second, since the above GCD = 1, then we can say that $1 = a(x)f(x)+b(x)g(x)$.



Can I then multiply both sides of the equation by $p(x)$ to result in $p(x) = p(x)a(x)f(x) + p(x)b(x)g(x)$?



Does that then allow me to say that as long as we define $alpha (x) = p(x)a(x)$ and $beta(x) = p(x)g(x)$ and we know that $F$ is a field so is multiplicatively closed, then $alpha(x), beta(x) in F$, that $p(x)=alpha(x)f(x)+beta(x)g(x)$?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    I think you mean for every polynomial $p(x)$ there exist $alpha(x)$ and $beta(x)$ such that...
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Israel
    Feb 17 at 21:23










  • $begingroup$
    The quantifiers in your statement aren't what you intend. What you mean to say, I believe, is that, given $p(x)in F[x]$ there exist $alpha(x),beta (x)in F[x]$ which satisfy the equation you write. That statement is what you (correctly) argue, starting from the result that you can solve the problem for $p(x)=1$.
    $endgroup$
    – lulu
    Feb 17 at 21:24










  • $begingroup$
    I corrected the original problem. Sorry, in an effort to shorten the statement I changed the meaning a little.
    $endgroup$
    – MT math
    Feb 17 at 21:36















0












$begingroup$


Let $f(x)$ and $g(x)$ be irreducible polynomials of different degrees in field $F[x]$. Prove that for all $p(x) in F[x]$ that there exists some $alpha(x), beta(x)in F[x]$ such that $p(x) = alpha (x)f(x) + beta (x)g(x).$



I think I have a legitimate proof for this, however I would like to check my thinking.



First, $f(x)$ and $g(x)$ are irreducible and have different degrees, then they are the polynomial equivalent to relatively prime numbers and therefore have a GCD of 1. I did use my definition about irreducible polynomials from the text, but just want to soldify thinking with something I'm already comfortable with.



Second, since the above GCD = 1, then we can say that $1 = a(x)f(x)+b(x)g(x)$.



Can I then multiply both sides of the equation by $p(x)$ to result in $p(x) = p(x)a(x)f(x) + p(x)b(x)g(x)$?



Does that then allow me to say that as long as we define $alpha (x) = p(x)a(x)$ and $beta(x) = p(x)g(x)$ and we know that $F$ is a field so is multiplicatively closed, then $alpha(x), beta(x) in F$, that $p(x)=alpha(x)f(x)+beta(x)g(x)$?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    I think you mean for every polynomial $p(x)$ there exist $alpha(x)$ and $beta(x)$ such that...
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Israel
    Feb 17 at 21:23










  • $begingroup$
    The quantifiers in your statement aren't what you intend. What you mean to say, I believe, is that, given $p(x)in F[x]$ there exist $alpha(x),beta (x)in F[x]$ which satisfy the equation you write. That statement is what you (correctly) argue, starting from the result that you can solve the problem for $p(x)=1$.
    $endgroup$
    – lulu
    Feb 17 at 21:24










  • $begingroup$
    I corrected the original problem. Sorry, in an effort to shorten the statement I changed the meaning a little.
    $endgroup$
    – MT math
    Feb 17 at 21:36













0












0








0





$begingroup$


Let $f(x)$ and $g(x)$ be irreducible polynomials of different degrees in field $F[x]$. Prove that for all $p(x) in F[x]$ that there exists some $alpha(x), beta(x)in F[x]$ such that $p(x) = alpha (x)f(x) + beta (x)g(x).$



I think I have a legitimate proof for this, however I would like to check my thinking.



First, $f(x)$ and $g(x)$ are irreducible and have different degrees, then they are the polynomial equivalent to relatively prime numbers and therefore have a GCD of 1. I did use my definition about irreducible polynomials from the text, but just want to soldify thinking with something I'm already comfortable with.



Second, since the above GCD = 1, then we can say that $1 = a(x)f(x)+b(x)g(x)$.



Can I then multiply both sides of the equation by $p(x)$ to result in $p(x) = p(x)a(x)f(x) + p(x)b(x)g(x)$?



Does that then allow me to say that as long as we define $alpha (x) = p(x)a(x)$ and $beta(x) = p(x)g(x)$ and we know that $F$ is a field so is multiplicatively closed, then $alpha(x), beta(x) in F$, that $p(x)=alpha(x)f(x)+beta(x)g(x)$?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




Let $f(x)$ and $g(x)$ be irreducible polynomials of different degrees in field $F[x]$. Prove that for all $p(x) in F[x]$ that there exists some $alpha(x), beta(x)in F[x]$ such that $p(x) = alpha (x)f(x) + beta (x)g(x).$



I think I have a legitimate proof for this, however I would like to check my thinking.



First, $f(x)$ and $g(x)$ are irreducible and have different degrees, then they are the polynomial equivalent to relatively prime numbers and therefore have a GCD of 1. I did use my definition about irreducible polynomials from the text, but just want to soldify thinking with something I'm already comfortable with.



Second, since the above GCD = 1, then we can say that $1 = a(x)f(x)+b(x)g(x)$.



Can I then multiply both sides of the equation by $p(x)$ to result in $p(x) = p(x)a(x)f(x) + p(x)b(x)g(x)$?



Does that then allow me to say that as long as we define $alpha (x) = p(x)a(x)$ and $beta(x) = p(x)g(x)$ and we know that $F$ is a field so is multiplicatively closed, then $alpha(x), beta(x) in F$, that $p(x)=alpha(x)f(x)+beta(x)g(x)$?







field-theory irreducible-polynomials






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 2 days ago









Sil

5,16421643




5,16421643










asked Feb 17 at 21:18









MT mathMT math

11




11











  • $begingroup$
    I think you mean for every polynomial $p(x)$ there exist $alpha(x)$ and $beta(x)$ such that...
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Israel
    Feb 17 at 21:23










  • $begingroup$
    The quantifiers in your statement aren't what you intend. What you mean to say, I believe, is that, given $p(x)in F[x]$ there exist $alpha(x),beta (x)in F[x]$ which satisfy the equation you write. That statement is what you (correctly) argue, starting from the result that you can solve the problem for $p(x)=1$.
    $endgroup$
    – lulu
    Feb 17 at 21:24










  • $begingroup$
    I corrected the original problem. Sorry, in an effort to shorten the statement I changed the meaning a little.
    $endgroup$
    – MT math
    Feb 17 at 21:36
















  • $begingroup$
    I think you mean for every polynomial $p(x)$ there exist $alpha(x)$ and $beta(x)$ such that...
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Israel
    Feb 17 at 21:23










  • $begingroup$
    The quantifiers in your statement aren't what you intend. What you mean to say, I believe, is that, given $p(x)in F[x]$ there exist $alpha(x),beta (x)in F[x]$ which satisfy the equation you write. That statement is what you (correctly) argue, starting from the result that you can solve the problem for $p(x)=1$.
    $endgroup$
    – lulu
    Feb 17 at 21:24










  • $begingroup$
    I corrected the original problem. Sorry, in an effort to shorten the statement I changed the meaning a little.
    $endgroup$
    – MT math
    Feb 17 at 21:36















$begingroup$
I think you mean for every polynomial $p(x)$ there exist $alpha(x)$ and $beta(x)$ such that...
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
Feb 17 at 21:23




$begingroup$
I think you mean for every polynomial $p(x)$ there exist $alpha(x)$ and $beta(x)$ such that...
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
Feb 17 at 21:23












$begingroup$
The quantifiers in your statement aren't what you intend. What you mean to say, I believe, is that, given $p(x)in F[x]$ there exist $alpha(x),beta (x)in F[x]$ which satisfy the equation you write. That statement is what you (correctly) argue, starting from the result that you can solve the problem for $p(x)=1$.
$endgroup$
– lulu
Feb 17 at 21:24




$begingroup$
The quantifiers in your statement aren't what you intend. What you mean to say, I believe, is that, given $p(x)in F[x]$ there exist $alpha(x),beta (x)in F[x]$ which satisfy the equation you write. That statement is what you (correctly) argue, starting from the result that you can solve the problem for $p(x)=1$.
$endgroup$
– lulu
Feb 17 at 21:24












$begingroup$
I corrected the original problem. Sorry, in an effort to shorten the statement I changed the meaning a little.
$endgroup$
– MT math
Feb 17 at 21:36




$begingroup$
I corrected the original problem. Sorry, in an effort to shorten the statement I changed the meaning a little.
$endgroup$
– MT math
Feb 17 at 21:36










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















1












$begingroup$

Yes, if $p(x)$ and $q(x)$ are irreducible over the field $F$ and neither is a scalar multiple of the other their gcd is $1$, and then since $F[x]$ is a principal ideal domain you have Bézout's identity. In fact you just need $p(x)$ to be irreducible and not to divide $q(x)$ (or the same with $p$ and $q$ interchanged).






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$












    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',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    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%2f3116792%2fprove-that-px-alpha-xfx-beta-xgx-for-some-irreducible-fx%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    1












    $begingroup$

    Yes, if $p(x)$ and $q(x)$ are irreducible over the field $F$ and neither is a scalar multiple of the other their gcd is $1$, and then since $F[x]$ is a principal ideal domain you have Bézout's identity. In fact you just need $p(x)$ to be irreducible and not to divide $q(x)$ (or the same with $p$ and $q$ interchanged).






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$

















      1












      $begingroup$

      Yes, if $p(x)$ and $q(x)$ are irreducible over the field $F$ and neither is a scalar multiple of the other their gcd is $1$, and then since $F[x]$ is a principal ideal domain you have Bézout's identity. In fact you just need $p(x)$ to be irreducible and not to divide $q(x)$ (or the same with $p$ and $q$ interchanged).






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$















        1












        1








        1





        $begingroup$

        Yes, if $p(x)$ and $q(x)$ are irreducible over the field $F$ and neither is a scalar multiple of the other their gcd is $1$, and then since $F[x]$ is a principal ideal domain you have Bézout's identity. In fact you just need $p(x)$ to be irreducible and not to divide $q(x)$ (or the same with $p$ and $q$ interchanged).






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        Yes, if $p(x)$ and $q(x)$ are irreducible over the field $F$ and neither is a scalar multiple of the other their gcd is $1$, and then since $F[x]$ is a principal ideal domain you have Bézout's identity. In fact you just need $p(x)$ to be irreducible and not to divide $q(x)$ (or the same with $p$ and $q$ interchanged).







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Feb 17 at 21:29









        Robert IsraelRobert Israel

        327k23216470




        327k23216470



























            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3116792%2fprove-that-px-alpha-xfx-beta-xgx-for-some-irreducible-fx%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Lowndes Grove History Architecture References Navigation menu32°48′6″N 79°57′58″W / 32.80167°N 79.96611°W / 32.80167; -79.9661132°48′6″N 79°57′58″W / 32.80167°N 79.96611°W / 32.80167; -79.9661178002500"National Register Information System"Historic houses of South Carolina"Lowndes Grove""+32° 48' 6.00", −79° 57' 58.00""Lowndes Grove, Charleston County (260 St. Margaret St., Charleston)""Lowndes Grove"The Charleston ExpositionIt Happened in South Carolina"Lowndes Grove (House), Saint Margaret Street & Sixth Avenue, Charleston, Charleston County, SC(Photographs)"Plantations of the Carolina Low Countrye

            random experiment with two different functions on unit interval Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Random variable and probability space notionsRandom Walk with EdgesFinding functions where the increase over a random interval is Poisson distributedNumber of days until dayCan an observed event in fact be of zero probability?Unit random processmodels of coins and uniform distributionHow to get the number of successes given $n$ trials , probability $P$ and a random variable $X$Absorbing Markov chain in a computer. Is “almost every” turned into always convergence in computer executions?Stopped random walk is not uniformly integrable

            How should I support this large drywall patch? Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern) Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?How do I cover large gaps in drywall?How do I keep drywall around a patch from crumbling?Can I glue a second layer of drywall?How to patch long strip on drywall?Large drywall patch: how to avoid bulging seams?Drywall Mesh Patch vs. Bulge? To remove or not to remove?How to fix this drywall job?Prep drywall before backsplashWhat's the best way to fix this horrible drywall patch job?Drywall patching using 3M Patch Plus Primer