Polynomials $P(x)in k[x]$ satisfying condition $P(x^2)=P(-x)P(x)$
This question is inspired by this thread which is on hold at the moment. Fix a field $k$. Let $P(x)in k[x]$ be such that $$(1) P(x^2)=P(-x)P(x).$$
Let $T(k,d)subseteq k[x]$ denote the set of solutions to $(1)$ of degree $d$, and $t(k,d)=big|T(k,d)big|$. Constant solutions are obviously $Pequiv 0$ and $Pequiv 1$. So $T(k,0)={0,1}$ and $t(k,0)=2$. We assume from now on that $d>0$, so $P(x)$ is non-constant.
Questions: (a) Is it possible to list all elements of $T(k,d)$? (b) How to calculate $t(k,d)$? (If this is too broad, we can take $k$ to be $Bbb R$ or $Bbb C$.)
Here is my attempt. If $zin overline{k}$ is a root of $P(x)$, then $z^{2^n}$ is a root of $P(x)$ for every $n$. Since $P$ has finitely many roots, we must have $z=0$ or $z^{2^n-1}=1$ for some positive integer $n$. Suppose that $0$ is a root of $P(x)$ of multiplicity $m_0$. Then, $P(x)=x^{m_0}P_1(x)$ for some $P_1(x)in k[x]$ such that $P_1(0)neq 0$. Using $(1)$ we get
$$(2) P_1(x^2)=(-1)^{m_0}P_1(-x)P_1(x).$$
Let $m_1$ be the smallest positive integer such that $P_1(x)$ has a root $w_1inoverline k$ such that $w_1^{2^{m_1}-1}=1$. Because $m_1$ is the smallest possible, $w_1$, $w_1^2$, $w_1^{2^2}$, $ldots$, $w_1^{2^{m_1-1}}$ are pairwise distinct roots of $P_1(x)$. This shows that
$$P_1(x)=prod_{r=0}^{m_1-1}left(x-w_1^{2^r}right)P_2(x),$$
where $P_2(x)inoverline{k}[x]$ satisfies
$$P_2(x^2)=(-1)^{m_0+m_1}P_2(-x)P_2(x).$$
In the end, we can use induction to show that there exist integers $m_0geq 0$, $m_1>0$, $m_2>0$, $dots$, $m_l>0$ such that
$$(3) P(x)=(-1)^d,x^{m_0},W_1(x),W_2(x),cdots,W_l(x),,$$
where $m_0+m_1+m_2+ldots+m_l=d$ and each $W_j(x)in overline{k}[x]$ is of the form
$$prod_{r=0}^{m_j-1},left(x-w_j^{2^{r}}right),,$$
where each $w_jinoverline{k}$ is a root of $z^{2^{m_j}-1}-1$, but not a root of $z^{2^r-1}=1$ for any positive integer $r<m_j$. If $k$ is algebraically closed then $(3)$ is as good a description as you can get, I guess. But what happens when $k$ is not algebraically closed?
In particular, if $d=4$ and $k=Bbb C$, there are the following possible choices:
$P(x)=x^4$
$P(x)=x^3,(x-1)$
$P(x)=x^2,(x-1)^2$
$P(x)=x^2,(x^2+x+1)$
$P(x)=x,(x-1)^3$
$P(x)=x,(x-1),(x^2+x+1)$
$P(x)=x,prodlimits_{r=0}^2,Bigg(x-expleft(frac{2pi {2^r} i}{7}right)Bigg)$
$P(x)=x,prodlimits_{r=0}^2,Bigg(x-expleft(-frac{2pi {2^r} i}{7}right)Bigg)$
$P(x)=(x-1)^4$
$P(x)=(x-1)^2,(x^2+x+1)$
$P(x)=(x-1),prodlimits_{r=0}^2,Bigg(x-expleft(frac{2pi {2^r} i}{7}right)Bigg)$
$P(x)=(x-1),prodlimits_{r=0}^2,Bigg(x-expleft(-frac{2pi {2^r} i}{7}right)Bigg)$
$P(x)=(x^2+x+1)^2$
$P(x)=prodlimits_{r=0}^3,Bigg(x-expleft(frac{2pi {2^r} i}{15}right)Bigg)$
$P(x)=prodlimits_{r=0}^3,Bigg(x-expleft(-frac{2pi {2^r} i}{15}right)Bigg)$
$P(x)=x^4+x^3+x^2+x+1$.
Unless I omitted something, this gives $t(Bbb C,4)=16$. Furthermore, only polynomials 1-6, 9-10, 13, 16 have real coefficients (in fact rationals), $t(Bbb R,4)= t(Bbb Q,4)=10$.
combinatorics polynomials field-theory extension-field functional-equations
add a comment |
This question is inspired by this thread which is on hold at the moment. Fix a field $k$. Let $P(x)in k[x]$ be such that $$(1) P(x^2)=P(-x)P(x).$$
Let $T(k,d)subseteq k[x]$ denote the set of solutions to $(1)$ of degree $d$, and $t(k,d)=big|T(k,d)big|$. Constant solutions are obviously $Pequiv 0$ and $Pequiv 1$. So $T(k,0)={0,1}$ and $t(k,0)=2$. We assume from now on that $d>0$, so $P(x)$ is non-constant.
Questions: (a) Is it possible to list all elements of $T(k,d)$? (b) How to calculate $t(k,d)$? (If this is too broad, we can take $k$ to be $Bbb R$ or $Bbb C$.)
Here is my attempt. If $zin overline{k}$ is a root of $P(x)$, then $z^{2^n}$ is a root of $P(x)$ for every $n$. Since $P$ has finitely many roots, we must have $z=0$ or $z^{2^n-1}=1$ for some positive integer $n$. Suppose that $0$ is a root of $P(x)$ of multiplicity $m_0$. Then, $P(x)=x^{m_0}P_1(x)$ for some $P_1(x)in k[x]$ such that $P_1(0)neq 0$. Using $(1)$ we get
$$(2) P_1(x^2)=(-1)^{m_0}P_1(-x)P_1(x).$$
Let $m_1$ be the smallest positive integer such that $P_1(x)$ has a root $w_1inoverline k$ such that $w_1^{2^{m_1}-1}=1$. Because $m_1$ is the smallest possible, $w_1$, $w_1^2$, $w_1^{2^2}$, $ldots$, $w_1^{2^{m_1-1}}$ are pairwise distinct roots of $P_1(x)$. This shows that
$$P_1(x)=prod_{r=0}^{m_1-1}left(x-w_1^{2^r}right)P_2(x),$$
where $P_2(x)inoverline{k}[x]$ satisfies
$$P_2(x^2)=(-1)^{m_0+m_1}P_2(-x)P_2(x).$$
In the end, we can use induction to show that there exist integers $m_0geq 0$, $m_1>0$, $m_2>0$, $dots$, $m_l>0$ such that
$$(3) P(x)=(-1)^d,x^{m_0},W_1(x),W_2(x),cdots,W_l(x),,$$
where $m_0+m_1+m_2+ldots+m_l=d$ and each $W_j(x)in overline{k}[x]$ is of the form
$$prod_{r=0}^{m_j-1},left(x-w_j^{2^{r}}right),,$$
where each $w_jinoverline{k}$ is a root of $z^{2^{m_j}-1}-1$, but not a root of $z^{2^r-1}=1$ for any positive integer $r<m_j$. If $k$ is algebraically closed then $(3)$ is as good a description as you can get, I guess. But what happens when $k$ is not algebraically closed?
In particular, if $d=4$ and $k=Bbb C$, there are the following possible choices:
$P(x)=x^4$
$P(x)=x^3,(x-1)$
$P(x)=x^2,(x-1)^2$
$P(x)=x^2,(x^2+x+1)$
$P(x)=x,(x-1)^3$
$P(x)=x,(x-1),(x^2+x+1)$
$P(x)=x,prodlimits_{r=0}^2,Bigg(x-expleft(frac{2pi {2^r} i}{7}right)Bigg)$
$P(x)=x,prodlimits_{r=0}^2,Bigg(x-expleft(-frac{2pi {2^r} i}{7}right)Bigg)$
$P(x)=(x-1)^4$
$P(x)=(x-1)^2,(x^2+x+1)$
$P(x)=(x-1),prodlimits_{r=0}^2,Bigg(x-expleft(frac{2pi {2^r} i}{7}right)Bigg)$
$P(x)=(x-1),prodlimits_{r=0}^2,Bigg(x-expleft(-frac{2pi {2^r} i}{7}right)Bigg)$
$P(x)=(x^2+x+1)^2$
$P(x)=prodlimits_{r=0}^3,Bigg(x-expleft(frac{2pi {2^r} i}{15}right)Bigg)$
$P(x)=prodlimits_{r=0}^3,Bigg(x-expleft(-frac{2pi {2^r} i}{15}right)Bigg)$
$P(x)=x^4+x^3+x^2+x+1$.
Unless I omitted something, this gives $t(Bbb C,4)=16$. Furthermore, only polynomials 1-6, 9-10, 13, 16 have real coefficients (in fact rationals), $t(Bbb R,4)= t(Bbb Q,4)=10$.
combinatorics polynomials field-theory extension-field functional-equations
1
I don't think it follows that "we must have $z=0$ or $z^{2^n-1}=1$ for some positive integer $n$". Since $P$ has finitely many roots, we must have $j,k>j$ such that $z^{2^j} = z^{2^k}$, so either $z^{2^j} = 0$ or $1 = z^{2^k-2^j} = z^{2^j(2^{k-j} - 1)}$. Now, every odd number $c$ satisfies $2^{varphi(c)} equiv 1 pmod c$. Every integer $n$ can be written as $n=2^mc$ with odd $c$. Then $n$ is a factor of $2^m (2^{varphi(c)} - 1)$, so setting $j=m$ and $k=m+varphi(c)$ we haven't shown anything stronger than that $z$ must be zero or a root of unity.
– Peter Taylor
Nov 30 at 16:23
@PeterTaylor You are right, but the thing is, if $z$ is a root of $P(x)$, so $tilde{z}:=z^{2^j}$ is a root such that $tilde{z}^{2^{k-j}-1}=1$. In a sense, Snookie's statement is not entirely correct, but it is not very wrong either.
– Batominovski
Nov 30 at 19:13
@Batominovski, I'd just come to a similar conclusion from a different direction. Essentially, by pairing we must have cycles rather than rhos.
– Peter Taylor
Nov 30 at 19:14
add a comment |
This question is inspired by this thread which is on hold at the moment. Fix a field $k$. Let $P(x)in k[x]$ be such that $$(1) P(x^2)=P(-x)P(x).$$
Let $T(k,d)subseteq k[x]$ denote the set of solutions to $(1)$ of degree $d$, and $t(k,d)=big|T(k,d)big|$. Constant solutions are obviously $Pequiv 0$ and $Pequiv 1$. So $T(k,0)={0,1}$ and $t(k,0)=2$. We assume from now on that $d>0$, so $P(x)$ is non-constant.
Questions: (a) Is it possible to list all elements of $T(k,d)$? (b) How to calculate $t(k,d)$? (If this is too broad, we can take $k$ to be $Bbb R$ or $Bbb C$.)
Here is my attempt. If $zin overline{k}$ is a root of $P(x)$, then $z^{2^n}$ is a root of $P(x)$ for every $n$. Since $P$ has finitely many roots, we must have $z=0$ or $z^{2^n-1}=1$ for some positive integer $n$. Suppose that $0$ is a root of $P(x)$ of multiplicity $m_0$. Then, $P(x)=x^{m_0}P_1(x)$ for some $P_1(x)in k[x]$ such that $P_1(0)neq 0$. Using $(1)$ we get
$$(2) P_1(x^2)=(-1)^{m_0}P_1(-x)P_1(x).$$
Let $m_1$ be the smallest positive integer such that $P_1(x)$ has a root $w_1inoverline k$ such that $w_1^{2^{m_1}-1}=1$. Because $m_1$ is the smallest possible, $w_1$, $w_1^2$, $w_1^{2^2}$, $ldots$, $w_1^{2^{m_1-1}}$ are pairwise distinct roots of $P_1(x)$. This shows that
$$P_1(x)=prod_{r=0}^{m_1-1}left(x-w_1^{2^r}right)P_2(x),$$
where $P_2(x)inoverline{k}[x]$ satisfies
$$P_2(x^2)=(-1)^{m_0+m_1}P_2(-x)P_2(x).$$
In the end, we can use induction to show that there exist integers $m_0geq 0$, $m_1>0$, $m_2>0$, $dots$, $m_l>0$ such that
$$(3) P(x)=(-1)^d,x^{m_0},W_1(x),W_2(x),cdots,W_l(x),,$$
where $m_0+m_1+m_2+ldots+m_l=d$ and each $W_j(x)in overline{k}[x]$ is of the form
$$prod_{r=0}^{m_j-1},left(x-w_j^{2^{r}}right),,$$
where each $w_jinoverline{k}$ is a root of $z^{2^{m_j}-1}-1$, but not a root of $z^{2^r-1}=1$ for any positive integer $r<m_j$. If $k$ is algebraically closed then $(3)$ is as good a description as you can get, I guess. But what happens when $k$ is not algebraically closed?
In particular, if $d=4$ and $k=Bbb C$, there are the following possible choices:
$P(x)=x^4$
$P(x)=x^3,(x-1)$
$P(x)=x^2,(x-1)^2$
$P(x)=x^2,(x^2+x+1)$
$P(x)=x,(x-1)^3$
$P(x)=x,(x-1),(x^2+x+1)$
$P(x)=x,prodlimits_{r=0}^2,Bigg(x-expleft(frac{2pi {2^r} i}{7}right)Bigg)$
$P(x)=x,prodlimits_{r=0}^2,Bigg(x-expleft(-frac{2pi {2^r} i}{7}right)Bigg)$
$P(x)=(x-1)^4$
$P(x)=(x-1)^2,(x^2+x+1)$
$P(x)=(x-1),prodlimits_{r=0}^2,Bigg(x-expleft(frac{2pi {2^r} i}{7}right)Bigg)$
$P(x)=(x-1),prodlimits_{r=0}^2,Bigg(x-expleft(-frac{2pi {2^r} i}{7}right)Bigg)$
$P(x)=(x^2+x+1)^2$
$P(x)=prodlimits_{r=0}^3,Bigg(x-expleft(frac{2pi {2^r} i}{15}right)Bigg)$
$P(x)=prodlimits_{r=0}^3,Bigg(x-expleft(-frac{2pi {2^r} i}{15}right)Bigg)$
$P(x)=x^4+x^3+x^2+x+1$.
Unless I omitted something, this gives $t(Bbb C,4)=16$. Furthermore, only polynomials 1-6, 9-10, 13, 16 have real coefficients (in fact rationals), $t(Bbb R,4)= t(Bbb Q,4)=10$.
combinatorics polynomials field-theory extension-field functional-equations
This question is inspired by this thread which is on hold at the moment. Fix a field $k$. Let $P(x)in k[x]$ be such that $$(1) P(x^2)=P(-x)P(x).$$
Let $T(k,d)subseteq k[x]$ denote the set of solutions to $(1)$ of degree $d$, and $t(k,d)=big|T(k,d)big|$. Constant solutions are obviously $Pequiv 0$ and $Pequiv 1$. So $T(k,0)={0,1}$ and $t(k,0)=2$. We assume from now on that $d>0$, so $P(x)$ is non-constant.
Questions: (a) Is it possible to list all elements of $T(k,d)$? (b) How to calculate $t(k,d)$? (If this is too broad, we can take $k$ to be $Bbb R$ or $Bbb C$.)
Here is my attempt. If $zin overline{k}$ is a root of $P(x)$, then $z^{2^n}$ is a root of $P(x)$ for every $n$. Since $P$ has finitely many roots, we must have $z=0$ or $z^{2^n-1}=1$ for some positive integer $n$. Suppose that $0$ is a root of $P(x)$ of multiplicity $m_0$. Then, $P(x)=x^{m_0}P_1(x)$ for some $P_1(x)in k[x]$ such that $P_1(0)neq 0$. Using $(1)$ we get
$$(2) P_1(x^2)=(-1)^{m_0}P_1(-x)P_1(x).$$
Let $m_1$ be the smallest positive integer such that $P_1(x)$ has a root $w_1inoverline k$ such that $w_1^{2^{m_1}-1}=1$. Because $m_1$ is the smallest possible, $w_1$, $w_1^2$, $w_1^{2^2}$, $ldots$, $w_1^{2^{m_1-1}}$ are pairwise distinct roots of $P_1(x)$. This shows that
$$P_1(x)=prod_{r=0}^{m_1-1}left(x-w_1^{2^r}right)P_2(x),$$
where $P_2(x)inoverline{k}[x]$ satisfies
$$P_2(x^2)=(-1)^{m_0+m_1}P_2(-x)P_2(x).$$
In the end, we can use induction to show that there exist integers $m_0geq 0$, $m_1>0$, $m_2>0$, $dots$, $m_l>0$ such that
$$(3) P(x)=(-1)^d,x^{m_0},W_1(x),W_2(x),cdots,W_l(x),,$$
where $m_0+m_1+m_2+ldots+m_l=d$ and each $W_j(x)in overline{k}[x]$ is of the form
$$prod_{r=0}^{m_j-1},left(x-w_j^{2^{r}}right),,$$
where each $w_jinoverline{k}$ is a root of $z^{2^{m_j}-1}-1$, but not a root of $z^{2^r-1}=1$ for any positive integer $r<m_j$. If $k$ is algebraically closed then $(3)$ is as good a description as you can get, I guess. But what happens when $k$ is not algebraically closed?
In particular, if $d=4$ and $k=Bbb C$, there are the following possible choices:
$P(x)=x^4$
$P(x)=x^3,(x-1)$
$P(x)=x^2,(x-1)^2$
$P(x)=x^2,(x^2+x+1)$
$P(x)=x,(x-1)^3$
$P(x)=x,(x-1),(x^2+x+1)$
$P(x)=x,prodlimits_{r=0}^2,Bigg(x-expleft(frac{2pi {2^r} i}{7}right)Bigg)$
$P(x)=x,prodlimits_{r=0}^2,Bigg(x-expleft(-frac{2pi {2^r} i}{7}right)Bigg)$
$P(x)=(x-1)^4$
$P(x)=(x-1)^2,(x^2+x+1)$
$P(x)=(x-1),prodlimits_{r=0}^2,Bigg(x-expleft(frac{2pi {2^r} i}{7}right)Bigg)$
$P(x)=(x-1),prodlimits_{r=0}^2,Bigg(x-expleft(-frac{2pi {2^r} i}{7}right)Bigg)$
$P(x)=(x^2+x+1)^2$
$P(x)=prodlimits_{r=0}^3,Bigg(x-expleft(frac{2pi {2^r} i}{15}right)Bigg)$
$P(x)=prodlimits_{r=0}^3,Bigg(x-expleft(-frac{2pi {2^r} i}{15}right)Bigg)$
$P(x)=x^4+x^3+x^2+x+1$.
Unless I omitted something, this gives $t(Bbb C,4)=16$. Furthermore, only polynomials 1-6, 9-10, 13, 16 have real coefficients (in fact rationals), $t(Bbb R,4)= t(Bbb Q,4)=10$.
combinatorics polynomials field-theory extension-field functional-equations
combinatorics polynomials field-theory extension-field functional-equations
edited Dec 2 at 11:57
asked Nov 27 at 14:13
Snookie
1,30017
1,30017
1
I don't think it follows that "we must have $z=0$ or $z^{2^n-1}=1$ for some positive integer $n$". Since $P$ has finitely many roots, we must have $j,k>j$ such that $z^{2^j} = z^{2^k}$, so either $z^{2^j} = 0$ or $1 = z^{2^k-2^j} = z^{2^j(2^{k-j} - 1)}$. Now, every odd number $c$ satisfies $2^{varphi(c)} equiv 1 pmod c$. Every integer $n$ can be written as $n=2^mc$ with odd $c$. Then $n$ is a factor of $2^m (2^{varphi(c)} - 1)$, so setting $j=m$ and $k=m+varphi(c)$ we haven't shown anything stronger than that $z$ must be zero or a root of unity.
– Peter Taylor
Nov 30 at 16:23
@PeterTaylor You are right, but the thing is, if $z$ is a root of $P(x)$, so $tilde{z}:=z^{2^j}$ is a root such that $tilde{z}^{2^{k-j}-1}=1$. In a sense, Snookie's statement is not entirely correct, but it is not very wrong either.
– Batominovski
Nov 30 at 19:13
@Batominovski, I'd just come to a similar conclusion from a different direction. Essentially, by pairing we must have cycles rather than rhos.
– Peter Taylor
Nov 30 at 19:14
add a comment |
1
I don't think it follows that "we must have $z=0$ or $z^{2^n-1}=1$ for some positive integer $n$". Since $P$ has finitely many roots, we must have $j,k>j$ such that $z^{2^j} = z^{2^k}$, so either $z^{2^j} = 0$ or $1 = z^{2^k-2^j} = z^{2^j(2^{k-j} - 1)}$. Now, every odd number $c$ satisfies $2^{varphi(c)} equiv 1 pmod c$. Every integer $n$ can be written as $n=2^mc$ with odd $c$. Then $n$ is a factor of $2^m (2^{varphi(c)} - 1)$, so setting $j=m$ and $k=m+varphi(c)$ we haven't shown anything stronger than that $z$ must be zero or a root of unity.
– Peter Taylor
Nov 30 at 16:23
@PeterTaylor You are right, but the thing is, if $z$ is a root of $P(x)$, so $tilde{z}:=z^{2^j}$ is a root such that $tilde{z}^{2^{k-j}-1}=1$. In a sense, Snookie's statement is not entirely correct, but it is not very wrong either.
– Batominovski
Nov 30 at 19:13
@Batominovski, I'd just come to a similar conclusion from a different direction. Essentially, by pairing we must have cycles rather than rhos.
– Peter Taylor
Nov 30 at 19:14
1
1
I don't think it follows that "we must have $z=0$ or $z^{2^n-1}=1$ for some positive integer $n$". Since $P$ has finitely many roots, we must have $j,k>j$ such that $z^{2^j} = z^{2^k}$, so either $z^{2^j} = 0$ or $1 = z^{2^k-2^j} = z^{2^j(2^{k-j} - 1)}$. Now, every odd number $c$ satisfies $2^{varphi(c)} equiv 1 pmod c$. Every integer $n$ can be written as $n=2^mc$ with odd $c$. Then $n$ is a factor of $2^m (2^{varphi(c)} - 1)$, so setting $j=m$ and $k=m+varphi(c)$ we haven't shown anything stronger than that $z$ must be zero or a root of unity.
– Peter Taylor
Nov 30 at 16:23
I don't think it follows that "we must have $z=0$ or $z^{2^n-1}=1$ for some positive integer $n$". Since $P$ has finitely many roots, we must have $j,k>j$ such that $z^{2^j} = z^{2^k}$, so either $z^{2^j} = 0$ or $1 = z^{2^k-2^j} = z^{2^j(2^{k-j} - 1)}$. Now, every odd number $c$ satisfies $2^{varphi(c)} equiv 1 pmod c$. Every integer $n$ can be written as $n=2^mc$ with odd $c$. Then $n$ is a factor of $2^m (2^{varphi(c)} - 1)$, so setting $j=m$ and $k=m+varphi(c)$ we haven't shown anything stronger than that $z$ must be zero or a root of unity.
– Peter Taylor
Nov 30 at 16:23
@PeterTaylor You are right, but the thing is, if $z$ is a root of $P(x)$, so $tilde{z}:=z^{2^j}$ is a root such that $tilde{z}^{2^{k-j}-1}=1$. In a sense, Snookie's statement is not entirely correct, but it is not very wrong either.
– Batominovski
Nov 30 at 19:13
@PeterTaylor You are right, but the thing is, if $z$ is a root of $P(x)$, so $tilde{z}:=z^{2^j}$ is a root such that $tilde{z}^{2^{k-j}-1}=1$. In a sense, Snookie's statement is not entirely correct, but it is not very wrong either.
– Batominovski
Nov 30 at 19:13
@Batominovski, I'd just come to a similar conclusion from a different direction. Essentially, by pairing we must have cycles rather than rhos.
– Peter Taylor
Nov 30 at 19:14
@Batominovski, I'd just come to a similar conclusion from a different direction. Essentially, by pairing we must have cycles rather than rhos.
– Peter Taylor
Nov 30 at 19:14
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
If $zin overline{k}$ is a root of $P(x)$, then $z^{2^k}$ is a root of $P(x)$ for every $k$. Since $P$ has finitely many roots, we must have $z=0$ or $z^{2^n-1}=1$ for some positive integer $n$.
As I previously mentioned in a comment, I think this argument could do with filling a gap, so I'll start from scratch.
$P(x) in K[x]$ of degree $d$ satisfies $P(x^2) = P(x)P(-x)$. If we lift to the splitting field of $P$ over $K$, $P(x) = a_d prod_{i=1}^d (x - alpha_i)$. By the functional equation, $P(x) = (-1)^d a_d^2 prod_{i=1}^d (x - alpha_i^2)$. When $d=0$ we have the exceptional solution $P(x) = 0$; if $P(x)$ is non-zero then $a_d = (-1)^d$ and ${alpha_i} = {alpha_i^2}$ taken as multisets. Therefore there is a permutation $pi$ for which $alpha_i^2 = alpha_{pi(i)}$. If $i$ is in a cycle of length $n_i$ in $pi$ then $alpha^{2^{n_i}} = alpha_i$, so $alpha_i = 0$ or $alpha_i^{2^{n_i}-1} = 1$. If $alpha_i$ is a non-zero root, it's an odd power of unity, and so there is an odd $m_i$ for which it's a primitive $m_i$th root of unity. Then its minimum cycle length is the multiplicative order of $2 bmod m_i$, which I will denote $textrm{ord}_{m_i}(2)$ (or A002326$(frac{m_i-1}{2})$).
If $alpha_i in K$ then that cycle of $textrm{ord}_{m_i}(2)$ roots does not imply the presence of any other roots. However, if $alpha_i notin K$ then each of the roots in the cycle requires its entire minimal polynomial over $K$, so we account for a factor of the LCM of their minimal polynomials. Therefore the key questions are about how the cyclotomic polynomials split: how many conjugates does each root have, and how many distinct minimal polynomials are covered by a cycle?
I'm not aware of any standard notation for these statistics, so let $c_K(m_i)$ be the number of conjugates of a primitive $m_i$th root of unity over $K$, and $rho_K(m_i)$ be the number of distinct minimal polynomials covered by a cycle.
In general terms
Let $p$ be the characteristic of $K$. As shown in https://math.stackexchange.com/a/3025474/5676, there are no primitive $n$th roots of unity if $n$ is a multiple of $p$; otherwise there are exactly $varphi(n)$ (distinct) primitive $n$th roots of unity. (Note that in consequence for characteristic $2$ we don't lose any odd-power primitive roots of unity relative to characteristic $0$).
If there are primitive $m_i$th roots of unity, each comes as part of a set of $c_K(m_i) rho_K(m_i)$, so there are $frac{varphi(m_i)}{c_K(m_i) rho_K(m_i)}$ such sets. Therefore the generating function for the number of building blocks of $P$ with degree $n$ is (including the exceptional building block of degree one, $alpha_i = 0$) $$A_K(x) = x + sum_{substack{m textrm{ odd},\ p nmid m}} frac{varphi(m)}{c_K(m_i) rho_K(m_i)} x^{c_K(m_i) rho_K(m_i)}$$
To get a generating function for $t(K,d)$, we take $A_K$'s Euler transform $B_K$ and add $1$ for the exceptional solution $P(x) = 0$.
$K$ is algebraically closed and has characteristic $0$ or $2$
E.g. $K = mathbb{C}$. The cyclotomics split completely, so the minimal polynomials are linear and $c_K(m_i) = 1$ Obviously this means that $rho(m_i) = textrm{ord}_{m_i}(2)$.
$$A_{mathbb{C}}(x) = x + sum_{m textrm{ odd}} frac{varphi(m)}{textrm{ord}_m(2)} x^{textrm{ord}_m(2)}$$
$$begin{matrix}
d & 0 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 8 & 9 & 10 & 11 & 12 \
A_mathbb{C} & 0 & 2 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 6 & 9 & 18 & 30 & 56 & 99 & 186 & 335 \
1 + B_mathbb{C} & 2 & 2 & 4 & 8 & 16 & 32 & 64 & 128 & 256 & 512 & 1024 & 2048 & 4096
end{matrix}$$
$A_mathbb{C}(n)$ looks suspiciously like OEIS A001037, which is neatly explained by the description
Number of degree-$n$ irreducible polynomials over GF(2)
OEIS also confirms that the Euler transform of A001037 is the powers of $2$, so the conjecture which jumps out from the table is in fact true.
$mathbb{Q}$
The cyclotomic polynomials are irreducible, so $c_K(m_i) = varphi(m_i)$ and $rho(m_i) = 1$.
$$A_mathbb{Q}(x) = x + sum_{m textrm{ odd}} x^{varphi(m)}$$
$$begin{matrix}
d & 0 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 8 & 9 & 10 & 11 & 12 \
A_mathbb{Q} & 0 & 2 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 2 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 2 \
1 + B_mathbb{Q} & 2 & 2 & 4 & 6 & 10 & 14 & 22 & 30 & 44 & 58 & 81 & 104 & 143
end{matrix}$$
Obviously these are the two extremes (for characteristic zero). In between them we have fields where the cyclotomics split partially.
$mathbb{R}$
The first two cyclotomic polynomials are linear; the rest split into quadratics over $mathbb{R}$, pairing each complex root of unity with its conjugate, so $c_{mathbb{R}}(m_i) = 1 + [m_i > 2]$. A cycle contains a root and its square iff $-1$ is a power of $2 pmod{m_i}$, so $$rho_{mathbb{R}}(m_i) = begin{cases} 1 & m_i = 1 \ frac12 textrm{ord}_{m_i}(2) & 2^j equiv -1 pmod{m_i} \ textrm{ord}_{m_i}(2) & textrm{otherwise} end{cases}$$
The first $m_i$ to diverge from the rational case is $m_i = 17$, which retains its two separate $8$-cycles, so the values obtained are closer to those for $mathbb{Q}$ than for $mathbb{R}$.
$$begin{matrix}
d & 0 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 8 & 9 & 10 & 11 & 12 \
A_mathbb{R} & 0 & 2 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 2 & 0 & 3 & 0 & 6 & 0 & 9 \
1 + B_mathbb{R} & 2 & 2 & 4 & 6 & 10 & 14 & 22 & 30 & 46 & 62 & 94 & 126 & 190
end{matrix}$$
Finite fields
Consider $mathbb{F}_q$ where $q = p^a$ and $p$ is prime. Cribbing from another MSE answer,
Let $z$ be a primitive $n$th root of unity in an extension of $mathbb{F}_q$. Let $mathbb{F}_q[z]=mathbb{F}_{q^k}$. Because the multiplicative group of $mathbb{F}_{q^k}$ is cyclic of order $q^k-1$, we know that $k$ is the smallest positive integer with the property that $n mid q^k-1$. By the Galois theory of finite fields the minimal polynomial of $z$ is $$m(x)=(x-z)(x-z^q)(x-z^{q^2})cdots(x-z^{q^{k-1}})$$
So if $alpha$ is a primitive $n$th root, the elements of the cycle are $alpha^{2^i}$ and the elements of the root set are $(alpha^{2^i})^{q^j}$. Clearly characteristic $2$ is a special case, and $A_{mathbb{F}_{2^a}} = A_{mathbb{C}}$.
Rather than try to add a lot more tables to this answer for other prime characteristics, I've put some code on Github to generate them.
add a comment |
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
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3015816%2fpolynomials-px-in-kx-satisfying-condition-px2-p-xpx%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
If $zin overline{k}$ is a root of $P(x)$, then $z^{2^k}$ is a root of $P(x)$ for every $k$. Since $P$ has finitely many roots, we must have $z=0$ or $z^{2^n-1}=1$ for some positive integer $n$.
As I previously mentioned in a comment, I think this argument could do with filling a gap, so I'll start from scratch.
$P(x) in K[x]$ of degree $d$ satisfies $P(x^2) = P(x)P(-x)$. If we lift to the splitting field of $P$ over $K$, $P(x) = a_d prod_{i=1}^d (x - alpha_i)$. By the functional equation, $P(x) = (-1)^d a_d^2 prod_{i=1}^d (x - alpha_i^2)$. When $d=0$ we have the exceptional solution $P(x) = 0$; if $P(x)$ is non-zero then $a_d = (-1)^d$ and ${alpha_i} = {alpha_i^2}$ taken as multisets. Therefore there is a permutation $pi$ for which $alpha_i^2 = alpha_{pi(i)}$. If $i$ is in a cycle of length $n_i$ in $pi$ then $alpha^{2^{n_i}} = alpha_i$, so $alpha_i = 0$ or $alpha_i^{2^{n_i}-1} = 1$. If $alpha_i$ is a non-zero root, it's an odd power of unity, and so there is an odd $m_i$ for which it's a primitive $m_i$th root of unity. Then its minimum cycle length is the multiplicative order of $2 bmod m_i$, which I will denote $textrm{ord}_{m_i}(2)$ (or A002326$(frac{m_i-1}{2})$).
If $alpha_i in K$ then that cycle of $textrm{ord}_{m_i}(2)$ roots does not imply the presence of any other roots. However, if $alpha_i notin K$ then each of the roots in the cycle requires its entire minimal polynomial over $K$, so we account for a factor of the LCM of their minimal polynomials. Therefore the key questions are about how the cyclotomic polynomials split: how many conjugates does each root have, and how many distinct minimal polynomials are covered by a cycle?
I'm not aware of any standard notation for these statistics, so let $c_K(m_i)$ be the number of conjugates of a primitive $m_i$th root of unity over $K$, and $rho_K(m_i)$ be the number of distinct minimal polynomials covered by a cycle.
In general terms
Let $p$ be the characteristic of $K$. As shown in https://math.stackexchange.com/a/3025474/5676, there are no primitive $n$th roots of unity if $n$ is a multiple of $p$; otherwise there are exactly $varphi(n)$ (distinct) primitive $n$th roots of unity. (Note that in consequence for characteristic $2$ we don't lose any odd-power primitive roots of unity relative to characteristic $0$).
If there are primitive $m_i$th roots of unity, each comes as part of a set of $c_K(m_i) rho_K(m_i)$, so there are $frac{varphi(m_i)}{c_K(m_i) rho_K(m_i)}$ such sets. Therefore the generating function for the number of building blocks of $P$ with degree $n$ is (including the exceptional building block of degree one, $alpha_i = 0$) $$A_K(x) = x + sum_{substack{m textrm{ odd},\ p nmid m}} frac{varphi(m)}{c_K(m_i) rho_K(m_i)} x^{c_K(m_i) rho_K(m_i)}$$
To get a generating function for $t(K,d)$, we take $A_K$'s Euler transform $B_K$ and add $1$ for the exceptional solution $P(x) = 0$.
$K$ is algebraically closed and has characteristic $0$ or $2$
E.g. $K = mathbb{C}$. The cyclotomics split completely, so the minimal polynomials are linear and $c_K(m_i) = 1$ Obviously this means that $rho(m_i) = textrm{ord}_{m_i}(2)$.
$$A_{mathbb{C}}(x) = x + sum_{m textrm{ odd}} frac{varphi(m)}{textrm{ord}_m(2)} x^{textrm{ord}_m(2)}$$
$$begin{matrix}
d & 0 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 8 & 9 & 10 & 11 & 12 \
A_mathbb{C} & 0 & 2 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 6 & 9 & 18 & 30 & 56 & 99 & 186 & 335 \
1 + B_mathbb{C} & 2 & 2 & 4 & 8 & 16 & 32 & 64 & 128 & 256 & 512 & 1024 & 2048 & 4096
end{matrix}$$
$A_mathbb{C}(n)$ looks suspiciously like OEIS A001037, which is neatly explained by the description
Number of degree-$n$ irreducible polynomials over GF(2)
OEIS also confirms that the Euler transform of A001037 is the powers of $2$, so the conjecture which jumps out from the table is in fact true.
$mathbb{Q}$
The cyclotomic polynomials are irreducible, so $c_K(m_i) = varphi(m_i)$ and $rho(m_i) = 1$.
$$A_mathbb{Q}(x) = x + sum_{m textrm{ odd}} x^{varphi(m)}$$
$$begin{matrix}
d & 0 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 8 & 9 & 10 & 11 & 12 \
A_mathbb{Q} & 0 & 2 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 2 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 2 \
1 + B_mathbb{Q} & 2 & 2 & 4 & 6 & 10 & 14 & 22 & 30 & 44 & 58 & 81 & 104 & 143
end{matrix}$$
Obviously these are the two extremes (for characteristic zero). In between them we have fields where the cyclotomics split partially.
$mathbb{R}$
The first two cyclotomic polynomials are linear; the rest split into quadratics over $mathbb{R}$, pairing each complex root of unity with its conjugate, so $c_{mathbb{R}}(m_i) = 1 + [m_i > 2]$. A cycle contains a root and its square iff $-1$ is a power of $2 pmod{m_i}$, so $$rho_{mathbb{R}}(m_i) = begin{cases} 1 & m_i = 1 \ frac12 textrm{ord}_{m_i}(2) & 2^j equiv -1 pmod{m_i} \ textrm{ord}_{m_i}(2) & textrm{otherwise} end{cases}$$
The first $m_i$ to diverge from the rational case is $m_i = 17$, which retains its two separate $8$-cycles, so the values obtained are closer to those for $mathbb{Q}$ than for $mathbb{R}$.
$$begin{matrix}
d & 0 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 8 & 9 & 10 & 11 & 12 \
A_mathbb{R} & 0 & 2 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 2 & 0 & 3 & 0 & 6 & 0 & 9 \
1 + B_mathbb{R} & 2 & 2 & 4 & 6 & 10 & 14 & 22 & 30 & 46 & 62 & 94 & 126 & 190
end{matrix}$$
Finite fields
Consider $mathbb{F}_q$ where $q = p^a$ and $p$ is prime. Cribbing from another MSE answer,
Let $z$ be a primitive $n$th root of unity in an extension of $mathbb{F}_q$. Let $mathbb{F}_q[z]=mathbb{F}_{q^k}$. Because the multiplicative group of $mathbb{F}_{q^k}$ is cyclic of order $q^k-1$, we know that $k$ is the smallest positive integer with the property that $n mid q^k-1$. By the Galois theory of finite fields the minimal polynomial of $z$ is $$m(x)=(x-z)(x-z^q)(x-z^{q^2})cdots(x-z^{q^{k-1}})$$
So if $alpha$ is a primitive $n$th root, the elements of the cycle are $alpha^{2^i}$ and the elements of the root set are $(alpha^{2^i})^{q^j}$. Clearly characteristic $2$ is a special case, and $A_{mathbb{F}_{2^a}} = A_{mathbb{C}}$.
Rather than try to add a lot more tables to this answer for other prime characteristics, I've put some code on Github to generate them.
add a comment |
If $zin overline{k}$ is a root of $P(x)$, then $z^{2^k}$ is a root of $P(x)$ for every $k$. Since $P$ has finitely many roots, we must have $z=0$ or $z^{2^n-1}=1$ for some positive integer $n$.
As I previously mentioned in a comment, I think this argument could do with filling a gap, so I'll start from scratch.
$P(x) in K[x]$ of degree $d$ satisfies $P(x^2) = P(x)P(-x)$. If we lift to the splitting field of $P$ over $K$, $P(x) = a_d prod_{i=1}^d (x - alpha_i)$. By the functional equation, $P(x) = (-1)^d a_d^2 prod_{i=1}^d (x - alpha_i^2)$. When $d=0$ we have the exceptional solution $P(x) = 0$; if $P(x)$ is non-zero then $a_d = (-1)^d$ and ${alpha_i} = {alpha_i^2}$ taken as multisets. Therefore there is a permutation $pi$ for which $alpha_i^2 = alpha_{pi(i)}$. If $i$ is in a cycle of length $n_i$ in $pi$ then $alpha^{2^{n_i}} = alpha_i$, so $alpha_i = 0$ or $alpha_i^{2^{n_i}-1} = 1$. If $alpha_i$ is a non-zero root, it's an odd power of unity, and so there is an odd $m_i$ for which it's a primitive $m_i$th root of unity. Then its minimum cycle length is the multiplicative order of $2 bmod m_i$, which I will denote $textrm{ord}_{m_i}(2)$ (or A002326$(frac{m_i-1}{2})$).
If $alpha_i in K$ then that cycle of $textrm{ord}_{m_i}(2)$ roots does not imply the presence of any other roots. However, if $alpha_i notin K$ then each of the roots in the cycle requires its entire minimal polynomial over $K$, so we account for a factor of the LCM of their minimal polynomials. Therefore the key questions are about how the cyclotomic polynomials split: how many conjugates does each root have, and how many distinct minimal polynomials are covered by a cycle?
I'm not aware of any standard notation for these statistics, so let $c_K(m_i)$ be the number of conjugates of a primitive $m_i$th root of unity over $K$, and $rho_K(m_i)$ be the number of distinct minimal polynomials covered by a cycle.
In general terms
Let $p$ be the characteristic of $K$. As shown in https://math.stackexchange.com/a/3025474/5676, there are no primitive $n$th roots of unity if $n$ is a multiple of $p$; otherwise there are exactly $varphi(n)$ (distinct) primitive $n$th roots of unity. (Note that in consequence for characteristic $2$ we don't lose any odd-power primitive roots of unity relative to characteristic $0$).
If there are primitive $m_i$th roots of unity, each comes as part of a set of $c_K(m_i) rho_K(m_i)$, so there are $frac{varphi(m_i)}{c_K(m_i) rho_K(m_i)}$ such sets. Therefore the generating function for the number of building blocks of $P$ with degree $n$ is (including the exceptional building block of degree one, $alpha_i = 0$) $$A_K(x) = x + sum_{substack{m textrm{ odd},\ p nmid m}} frac{varphi(m)}{c_K(m_i) rho_K(m_i)} x^{c_K(m_i) rho_K(m_i)}$$
To get a generating function for $t(K,d)$, we take $A_K$'s Euler transform $B_K$ and add $1$ for the exceptional solution $P(x) = 0$.
$K$ is algebraically closed and has characteristic $0$ or $2$
E.g. $K = mathbb{C}$. The cyclotomics split completely, so the minimal polynomials are linear and $c_K(m_i) = 1$ Obviously this means that $rho(m_i) = textrm{ord}_{m_i}(2)$.
$$A_{mathbb{C}}(x) = x + sum_{m textrm{ odd}} frac{varphi(m)}{textrm{ord}_m(2)} x^{textrm{ord}_m(2)}$$
$$begin{matrix}
d & 0 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 8 & 9 & 10 & 11 & 12 \
A_mathbb{C} & 0 & 2 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 6 & 9 & 18 & 30 & 56 & 99 & 186 & 335 \
1 + B_mathbb{C} & 2 & 2 & 4 & 8 & 16 & 32 & 64 & 128 & 256 & 512 & 1024 & 2048 & 4096
end{matrix}$$
$A_mathbb{C}(n)$ looks suspiciously like OEIS A001037, which is neatly explained by the description
Number of degree-$n$ irreducible polynomials over GF(2)
OEIS also confirms that the Euler transform of A001037 is the powers of $2$, so the conjecture which jumps out from the table is in fact true.
$mathbb{Q}$
The cyclotomic polynomials are irreducible, so $c_K(m_i) = varphi(m_i)$ and $rho(m_i) = 1$.
$$A_mathbb{Q}(x) = x + sum_{m textrm{ odd}} x^{varphi(m)}$$
$$begin{matrix}
d & 0 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 8 & 9 & 10 & 11 & 12 \
A_mathbb{Q} & 0 & 2 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 2 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 2 \
1 + B_mathbb{Q} & 2 & 2 & 4 & 6 & 10 & 14 & 22 & 30 & 44 & 58 & 81 & 104 & 143
end{matrix}$$
Obviously these are the two extremes (for characteristic zero). In between them we have fields where the cyclotomics split partially.
$mathbb{R}$
The first two cyclotomic polynomials are linear; the rest split into quadratics over $mathbb{R}$, pairing each complex root of unity with its conjugate, so $c_{mathbb{R}}(m_i) = 1 + [m_i > 2]$. A cycle contains a root and its square iff $-1$ is a power of $2 pmod{m_i}$, so $$rho_{mathbb{R}}(m_i) = begin{cases} 1 & m_i = 1 \ frac12 textrm{ord}_{m_i}(2) & 2^j equiv -1 pmod{m_i} \ textrm{ord}_{m_i}(2) & textrm{otherwise} end{cases}$$
The first $m_i$ to diverge from the rational case is $m_i = 17$, which retains its two separate $8$-cycles, so the values obtained are closer to those for $mathbb{Q}$ than for $mathbb{R}$.
$$begin{matrix}
d & 0 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 8 & 9 & 10 & 11 & 12 \
A_mathbb{R} & 0 & 2 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 2 & 0 & 3 & 0 & 6 & 0 & 9 \
1 + B_mathbb{R} & 2 & 2 & 4 & 6 & 10 & 14 & 22 & 30 & 46 & 62 & 94 & 126 & 190
end{matrix}$$
Finite fields
Consider $mathbb{F}_q$ where $q = p^a$ and $p$ is prime. Cribbing from another MSE answer,
Let $z$ be a primitive $n$th root of unity in an extension of $mathbb{F}_q$. Let $mathbb{F}_q[z]=mathbb{F}_{q^k}$. Because the multiplicative group of $mathbb{F}_{q^k}$ is cyclic of order $q^k-1$, we know that $k$ is the smallest positive integer with the property that $n mid q^k-1$. By the Galois theory of finite fields the minimal polynomial of $z$ is $$m(x)=(x-z)(x-z^q)(x-z^{q^2})cdots(x-z^{q^{k-1}})$$
So if $alpha$ is a primitive $n$th root, the elements of the cycle are $alpha^{2^i}$ and the elements of the root set are $(alpha^{2^i})^{q^j}$. Clearly characteristic $2$ is a special case, and $A_{mathbb{F}_{2^a}} = A_{mathbb{C}}$.
Rather than try to add a lot more tables to this answer for other prime characteristics, I've put some code on Github to generate them.
add a comment |
If $zin overline{k}$ is a root of $P(x)$, then $z^{2^k}$ is a root of $P(x)$ for every $k$. Since $P$ has finitely many roots, we must have $z=0$ or $z^{2^n-1}=1$ for some positive integer $n$.
As I previously mentioned in a comment, I think this argument could do with filling a gap, so I'll start from scratch.
$P(x) in K[x]$ of degree $d$ satisfies $P(x^2) = P(x)P(-x)$. If we lift to the splitting field of $P$ over $K$, $P(x) = a_d prod_{i=1}^d (x - alpha_i)$. By the functional equation, $P(x) = (-1)^d a_d^2 prod_{i=1}^d (x - alpha_i^2)$. When $d=0$ we have the exceptional solution $P(x) = 0$; if $P(x)$ is non-zero then $a_d = (-1)^d$ and ${alpha_i} = {alpha_i^2}$ taken as multisets. Therefore there is a permutation $pi$ for which $alpha_i^2 = alpha_{pi(i)}$. If $i$ is in a cycle of length $n_i$ in $pi$ then $alpha^{2^{n_i}} = alpha_i$, so $alpha_i = 0$ or $alpha_i^{2^{n_i}-1} = 1$. If $alpha_i$ is a non-zero root, it's an odd power of unity, and so there is an odd $m_i$ for which it's a primitive $m_i$th root of unity. Then its minimum cycle length is the multiplicative order of $2 bmod m_i$, which I will denote $textrm{ord}_{m_i}(2)$ (or A002326$(frac{m_i-1}{2})$).
If $alpha_i in K$ then that cycle of $textrm{ord}_{m_i}(2)$ roots does not imply the presence of any other roots. However, if $alpha_i notin K$ then each of the roots in the cycle requires its entire minimal polynomial over $K$, so we account for a factor of the LCM of their minimal polynomials. Therefore the key questions are about how the cyclotomic polynomials split: how many conjugates does each root have, and how many distinct minimal polynomials are covered by a cycle?
I'm not aware of any standard notation for these statistics, so let $c_K(m_i)$ be the number of conjugates of a primitive $m_i$th root of unity over $K$, and $rho_K(m_i)$ be the number of distinct minimal polynomials covered by a cycle.
In general terms
Let $p$ be the characteristic of $K$. As shown in https://math.stackexchange.com/a/3025474/5676, there are no primitive $n$th roots of unity if $n$ is a multiple of $p$; otherwise there are exactly $varphi(n)$ (distinct) primitive $n$th roots of unity. (Note that in consequence for characteristic $2$ we don't lose any odd-power primitive roots of unity relative to characteristic $0$).
If there are primitive $m_i$th roots of unity, each comes as part of a set of $c_K(m_i) rho_K(m_i)$, so there are $frac{varphi(m_i)}{c_K(m_i) rho_K(m_i)}$ such sets. Therefore the generating function for the number of building blocks of $P$ with degree $n$ is (including the exceptional building block of degree one, $alpha_i = 0$) $$A_K(x) = x + sum_{substack{m textrm{ odd},\ p nmid m}} frac{varphi(m)}{c_K(m_i) rho_K(m_i)} x^{c_K(m_i) rho_K(m_i)}$$
To get a generating function for $t(K,d)$, we take $A_K$'s Euler transform $B_K$ and add $1$ for the exceptional solution $P(x) = 0$.
$K$ is algebraically closed and has characteristic $0$ or $2$
E.g. $K = mathbb{C}$. The cyclotomics split completely, so the minimal polynomials are linear and $c_K(m_i) = 1$ Obviously this means that $rho(m_i) = textrm{ord}_{m_i}(2)$.
$$A_{mathbb{C}}(x) = x + sum_{m textrm{ odd}} frac{varphi(m)}{textrm{ord}_m(2)} x^{textrm{ord}_m(2)}$$
$$begin{matrix}
d & 0 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 8 & 9 & 10 & 11 & 12 \
A_mathbb{C} & 0 & 2 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 6 & 9 & 18 & 30 & 56 & 99 & 186 & 335 \
1 + B_mathbb{C} & 2 & 2 & 4 & 8 & 16 & 32 & 64 & 128 & 256 & 512 & 1024 & 2048 & 4096
end{matrix}$$
$A_mathbb{C}(n)$ looks suspiciously like OEIS A001037, which is neatly explained by the description
Number of degree-$n$ irreducible polynomials over GF(2)
OEIS also confirms that the Euler transform of A001037 is the powers of $2$, so the conjecture which jumps out from the table is in fact true.
$mathbb{Q}$
The cyclotomic polynomials are irreducible, so $c_K(m_i) = varphi(m_i)$ and $rho(m_i) = 1$.
$$A_mathbb{Q}(x) = x + sum_{m textrm{ odd}} x^{varphi(m)}$$
$$begin{matrix}
d & 0 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 8 & 9 & 10 & 11 & 12 \
A_mathbb{Q} & 0 & 2 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 2 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 2 \
1 + B_mathbb{Q} & 2 & 2 & 4 & 6 & 10 & 14 & 22 & 30 & 44 & 58 & 81 & 104 & 143
end{matrix}$$
Obviously these are the two extremes (for characteristic zero). In between them we have fields where the cyclotomics split partially.
$mathbb{R}$
The first two cyclotomic polynomials are linear; the rest split into quadratics over $mathbb{R}$, pairing each complex root of unity with its conjugate, so $c_{mathbb{R}}(m_i) = 1 + [m_i > 2]$. A cycle contains a root and its square iff $-1$ is a power of $2 pmod{m_i}$, so $$rho_{mathbb{R}}(m_i) = begin{cases} 1 & m_i = 1 \ frac12 textrm{ord}_{m_i}(2) & 2^j equiv -1 pmod{m_i} \ textrm{ord}_{m_i}(2) & textrm{otherwise} end{cases}$$
The first $m_i$ to diverge from the rational case is $m_i = 17$, which retains its two separate $8$-cycles, so the values obtained are closer to those for $mathbb{Q}$ than for $mathbb{R}$.
$$begin{matrix}
d & 0 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 8 & 9 & 10 & 11 & 12 \
A_mathbb{R} & 0 & 2 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 2 & 0 & 3 & 0 & 6 & 0 & 9 \
1 + B_mathbb{R} & 2 & 2 & 4 & 6 & 10 & 14 & 22 & 30 & 46 & 62 & 94 & 126 & 190
end{matrix}$$
Finite fields
Consider $mathbb{F}_q$ where $q = p^a$ and $p$ is prime. Cribbing from another MSE answer,
Let $z$ be a primitive $n$th root of unity in an extension of $mathbb{F}_q$. Let $mathbb{F}_q[z]=mathbb{F}_{q^k}$. Because the multiplicative group of $mathbb{F}_{q^k}$ is cyclic of order $q^k-1$, we know that $k$ is the smallest positive integer with the property that $n mid q^k-1$. By the Galois theory of finite fields the minimal polynomial of $z$ is $$m(x)=(x-z)(x-z^q)(x-z^{q^2})cdots(x-z^{q^{k-1}})$$
So if $alpha$ is a primitive $n$th root, the elements of the cycle are $alpha^{2^i}$ and the elements of the root set are $(alpha^{2^i})^{q^j}$. Clearly characteristic $2$ is a special case, and $A_{mathbb{F}_{2^a}} = A_{mathbb{C}}$.
Rather than try to add a lot more tables to this answer for other prime characteristics, I've put some code on Github to generate them.
If $zin overline{k}$ is a root of $P(x)$, then $z^{2^k}$ is a root of $P(x)$ for every $k$. Since $P$ has finitely many roots, we must have $z=0$ or $z^{2^n-1}=1$ for some positive integer $n$.
As I previously mentioned in a comment, I think this argument could do with filling a gap, so I'll start from scratch.
$P(x) in K[x]$ of degree $d$ satisfies $P(x^2) = P(x)P(-x)$. If we lift to the splitting field of $P$ over $K$, $P(x) = a_d prod_{i=1}^d (x - alpha_i)$. By the functional equation, $P(x) = (-1)^d a_d^2 prod_{i=1}^d (x - alpha_i^2)$. When $d=0$ we have the exceptional solution $P(x) = 0$; if $P(x)$ is non-zero then $a_d = (-1)^d$ and ${alpha_i} = {alpha_i^2}$ taken as multisets. Therefore there is a permutation $pi$ for which $alpha_i^2 = alpha_{pi(i)}$. If $i$ is in a cycle of length $n_i$ in $pi$ then $alpha^{2^{n_i}} = alpha_i$, so $alpha_i = 0$ or $alpha_i^{2^{n_i}-1} = 1$. If $alpha_i$ is a non-zero root, it's an odd power of unity, and so there is an odd $m_i$ for which it's a primitive $m_i$th root of unity. Then its minimum cycle length is the multiplicative order of $2 bmod m_i$, which I will denote $textrm{ord}_{m_i}(2)$ (or A002326$(frac{m_i-1}{2})$).
If $alpha_i in K$ then that cycle of $textrm{ord}_{m_i}(2)$ roots does not imply the presence of any other roots. However, if $alpha_i notin K$ then each of the roots in the cycle requires its entire minimal polynomial over $K$, so we account for a factor of the LCM of their minimal polynomials. Therefore the key questions are about how the cyclotomic polynomials split: how many conjugates does each root have, and how many distinct minimal polynomials are covered by a cycle?
I'm not aware of any standard notation for these statistics, so let $c_K(m_i)$ be the number of conjugates of a primitive $m_i$th root of unity over $K$, and $rho_K(m_i)$ be the number of distinct minimal polynomials covered by a cycle.
In general terms
Let $p$ be the characteristic of $K$. As shown in https://math.stackexchange.com/a/3025474/5676, there are no primitive $n$th roots of unity if $n$ is a multiple of $p$; otherwise there are exactly $varphi(n)$ (distinct) primitive $n$th roots of unity. (Note that in consequence for characteristic $2$ we don't lose any odd-power primitive roots of unity relative to characteristic $0$).
If there are primitive $m_i$th roots of unity, each comes as part of a set of $c_K(m_i) rho_K(m_i)$, so there are $frac{varphi(m_i)}{c_K(m_i) rho_K(m_i)}$ such sets. Therefore the generating function for the number of building blocks of $P$ with degree $n$ is (including the exceptional building block of degree one, $alpha_i = 0$) $$A_K(x) = x + sum_{substack{m textrm{ odd},\ p nmid m}} frac{varphi(m)}{c_K(m_i) rho_K(m_i)} x^{c_K(m_i) rho_K(m_i)}$$
To get a generating function for $t(K,d)$, we take $A_K$'s Euler transform $B_K$ and add $1$ for the exceptional solution $P(x) = 0$.
$K$ is algebraically closed and has characteristic $0$ or $2$
E.g. $K = mathbb{C}$. The cyclotomics split completely, so the minimal polynomials are linear and $c_K(m_i) = 1$ Obviously this means that $rho(m_i) = textrm{ord}_{m_i}(2)$.
$$A_{mathbb{C}}(x) = x + sum_{m textrm{ odd}} frac{varphi(m)}{textrm{ord}_m(2)} x^{textrm{ord}_m(2)}$$
$$begin{matrix}
d & 0 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 8 & 9 & 10 & 11 & 12 \
A_mathbb{C} & 0 & 2 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 6 & 9 & 18 & 30 & 56 & 99 & 186 & 335 \
1 + B_mathbb{C} & 2 & 2 & 4 & 8 & 16 & 32 & 64 & 128 & 256 & 512 & 1024 & 2048 & 4096
end{matrix}$$
$A_mathbb{C}(n)$ looks suspiciously like OEIS A001037, which is neatly explained by the description
Number of degree-$n$ irreducible polynomials over GF(2)
OEIS also confirms that the Euler transform of A001037 is the powers of $2$, so the conjecture which jumps out from the table is in fact true.
$mathbb{Q}$
The cyclotomic polynomials are irreducible, so $c_K(m_i) = varphi(m_i)$ and $rho(m_i) = 1$.
$$A_mathbb{Q}(x) = x + sum_{m textrm{ odd}} x^{varphi(m)}$$
$$begin{matrix}
d & 0 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 8 & 9 & 10 & 11 & 12 \
A_mathbb{Q} & 0 & 2 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 2 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 2 \
1 + B_mathbb{Q} & 2 & 2 & 4 & 6 & 10 & 14 & 22 & 30 & 44 & 58 & 81 & 104 & 143
end{matrix}$$
Obviously these are the two extremes (for characteristic zero). In between them we have fields where the cyclotomics split partially.
$mathbb{R}$
The first two cyclotomic polynomials are linear; the rest split into quadratics over $mathbb{R}$, pairing each complex root of unity with its conjugate, so $c_{mathbb{R}}(m_i) = 1 + [m_i > 2]$. A cycle contains a root and its square iff $-1$ is a power of $2 pmod{m_i}$, so $$rho_{mathbb{R}}(m_i) = begin{cases} 1 & m_i = 1 \ frac12 textrm{ord}_{m_i}(2) & 2^j equiv -1 pmod{m_i} \ textrm{ord}_{m_i}(2) & textrm{otherwise} end{cases}$$
The first $m_i$ to diverge from the rational case is $m_i = 17$, which retains its two separate $8$-cycles, so the values obtained are closer to those for $mathbb{Q}$ than for $mathbb{R}$.
$$begin{matrix}
d & 0 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 8 & 9 & 10 & 11 & 12 \
A_mathbb{R} & 0 & 2 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 2 & 0 & 3 & 0 & 6 & 0 & 9 \
1 + B_mathbb{R} & 2 & 2 & 4 & 6 & 10 & 14 & 22 & 30 & 46 & 62 & 94 & 126 & 190
end{matrix}$$
Finite fields
Consider $mathbb{F}_q$ where $q = p^a$ and $p$ is prime. Cribbing from another MSE answer,
Let $z$ be a primitive $n$th root of unity in an extension of $mathbb{F}_q$. Let $mathbb{F}_q[z]=mathbb{F}_{q^k}$. Because the multiplicative group of $mathbb{F}_{q^k}$ is cyclic of order $q^k-1$, we know that $k$ is the smallest positive integer with the property that $n mid q^k-1$. By the Galois theory of finite fields the minimal polynomial of $z$ is $$m(x)=(x-z)(x-z^q)(x-z^{q^2})cdots(x-z^{q^{k-1}})$$
So if $alpha$ is a primitive $n$th root, the elements of the cycle are $alpha^{2^i}$ and the elements of the root set are $(alpha^{2^i})^{q^j}$. Clearly characteristic $2$ is a special case, and $A_{mathbb{F}_{2^a}} = A_{mathbb{C}}$.
Rather than try to add a lot more tables to this answer for other prime characteristics, I've put some code on Github to generate them.
edited Dec 5 at 9:19
answered Dec 1 at 1:09
Peter Taylor
8,67812240
8,67812240
add a comment |
add a comment |
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.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- 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.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3015816%2fpolynomials-px-in-kx-satisfying-condition-px2-p-xpx%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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
1
I don't think it follows that "we must have $z=0$ or $z^{2^n-1}=1$ for some positive integer $n$". Since $P$ has finitely many roots, we must have $j,k>j$ such that $z^{2^j} = z^{2^k}$, so either $z^{2^j} = 0$ or $1 = z^{2^k-2^j} = z^{2^j(2^{k-j} - 1)}$. Now, every odd number $c$ satisfies $2^{varphi(c)} equiv 1 pmod c$. Every integer $n$ can be written as $n=2^mc$ with odd $c$. Then $n$ is a factor of $2^m (2^{varphi(c)} - 1)$, so setting $j=m$ and $k=m+varphi(c)$ we haven't shown anything stronger than that $z$ must be zero or a root of unity.
– Peter Taylor
Nov 30 at 16:23
@PeterTaylor You are right, but the thing is, if $z$ is a root of $P(x)$, so $tilde{z}:=z^{2^j}$ is a root such that $tilde{z}^{2^{k-j}-1}=1$. In a sense, Snookie's statement is not entirely correct, but it is not very wrong either.
– Batominovski
Nov 30 at 19:13
@Batominovski, I'd just come to a similar conclusion from a different direction. Essentially, by pairing we must have cycles rather than rhos.
– Peter Taylor
Nov 30 at 19:14