How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced — the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted — a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated — a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
Polynomial Rings and Roots: Examples and Counterexamples
1 · Prerequisites
- Binary Operations, Monoids, Groups and Subgroups
- Congruences, the Integers Modulo n and the Chinese Remainder Theorem
- Construction of the Natural Numbers
- Construction of the Real Numbers via Cauchy Sequences
- Construction of the Real Numbers via Dedekind Cuts
- Cosets, Index and Lagrange's Theorem
- Countability and Uncountability
- Divisibility, Euclidean Domains, Principal Ideal Domains and Unique Factorisation
- Divisibility, Greatest Common Divisors and Bézout's Identity
- Finite Counting, Factorials and Binomial Coefficients
- Foundations of the Real Numbers for Analysis
- Group Homomorphisms and the Isomorphism Theorems
- Ideals, Quotient Rings and the Isomorphism Theorems for Rings
- Normal Subgroups and Quotient Groups
- Polynomial Rings, the Division Algorithm and Roots
- Primes, Euclid's Lemma and the Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic
- Relations, Functions, and Quotients
- Rings, Subrings, Integral Domains and Fields
- Roots, Rational Powers, and Classical Inequalities
- The ZFC Axioms and the Basic Set Constructions
2 · Summary
3 · Logical flowchart
4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs
None yet.
5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements
Polynomial addition and multiplication computed from coefficient convolution
Example
In , let and . Then
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The integer polynomials and .
Polynomial addition is coefficientwise, and the coefficient of in a product is the finite convolution sum (The polynomial ring over a commutative ring as finitely supported coefficient sequences with convolution).
The integers form a commutative ring (The integers form a commutative ring).
Verification
Coefficientwise addition over the commutative ring [L2] gives the coefficients .
Convolution gives coefficients , , , and in degrees , respectively, proving the displayed product.
Long division, the Euclidean algorithm and a Bézout identity in
Example
In , put and . Long division and the Euclidean algorithm give
Thus and
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The displayed polynomials .
Polynomial division over a field gives a unique remainder of degree below the divisor (Division algorithm for polynomials over a field).
The last nonzero Euclidean remainder, normalized to be monic, is the gcd and is a polynomial linear combination of the inputs (Bézout identity and the Euclidean algorithm for polynomials over a field).
The rational numbers form a field (The rationals form a field).
Verification
Direct multiplication gives , and , so these are the divisions licensed by [L1] over the field [L3].
The last nonzero remainder is , whose monic associate is ; negating the first remainder identity gives , in agreement with [L2].
Over , a nonconstant polynomial can be a unit and product degree can drop
Statement refuted
For every commutative ring , every unit of is constant and degrees add under multiplication of nonzero polynomials.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The ring and the polynomial .
Over a commutative ring, product degree is at most the sum of the degrees, and the coefficient at that sum is the product of the leading coefficients (Degree inequalities for sums and products over a commutative ring).
The ring is the quotient ring , so in it (For every , the congruence-class ring is the quotient ring ).
Counterexample
In , by [L2], so the nonconstant polynomial is a unit and is its own inverse.
Both factors have degree , but their product has degree ; [L1] permits this drop because the top coefficient is in , so both parts of the statement are refuted.
Division with a degree-small remainder can fail over when the leading coefficient of the divisor is not a unit
Statement refuted
For every commutative ring and every nonzero , each can be written with or .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The polynomials and in .
Division is guaranteed over a commutative ring when the divisor is monic (Division by a monic polynomial over a commutative ring).
The integers form a commutative ring (The integers form a commutative ring).
The only units of are and ( is a commutative monoid whose group of units is ; equivalently holds exactly for and ).
Counterexample
Suppose for contradiction that with or . If had positive degree and leading coefficient , then would have nonzero coefficient in degree , which the constant remainder could not cancel. Thus is a constant integer.
Comparing coefficients of then gives , which has no integer solution because is not a unit by [L3]. This does not contradict the monic-division theorem [L1], since is not monic; hence the claimed division statement fails.
Quadratics can have four roots over and
Statement refuted
Every nonzero quadratic over a commutative ring has at most two distinct roots.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The polynomials in and in .
The degree root bound holds for nonzero polynomials over integral domains (A nonzero polynomial of degree over an integral domain has at most distinct roots).
Over any commutative ring, is a root exactly when divides the polynomial (Factor theorem over a commutative ring).
The rings and are the corresponding quotient rings, so computations are modulo and (For every , the congruence-class ring is the quotient ring ).
Counterexample
Modulo , the four distinct residues satisfy , so they are roots of the nonzero quadratic .
Modulo , the four distinct odd residues have square congruent to , so they are roots of the nonzero quadratic ; these rings have zero divisors, so the domain hypothesis in [L1] fails and the statement is refuted.
Over , and the zero polynomial induce the same function but are distinct polynomials
Statement refuted
Two formal polynomials over a field are equal whenever they induce the same function on that field.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A prime , the field , and the polynomials and in .
Evaluation substitutes an element into a formal polynomial, while the formal polynomial itself is its coefficient sequence (Evaluation and roots of a polynomial in a commutative target ring).
Fermat's little theorem gives for every integer (Fermat's little theorem: for prime , implies , and always ).
The ring is the quotient (For every , the congruence-class ring is the quotient ring ).
A prime integer is greater than (Prime and composite integers: is prime when and its only positive divisors are and ).
For prime , the quotient ring is a field (For every prime , the two operations on make it a field).
Counterexample
Fact [L5] licenses the field . For every , choose an integer representative; [L2] and [L3] give , so and the zero polynomial induce the same function.
Because [L4] gives , the degrees and are distinct; as a coefficient sequence, has coefficient in degree and is therefore nonzero. Hence [L1] distinguishes from the zero formal polynomial and refutes the statement.
The polynomial is irreducible over
Example
The polynomial is irreducible in .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The polynomial .
A reduced rational root of an integer polynomial has numerator dividing the constant coefficient and denominator dividing the leading coefficient (Rational root theorem).
A quadratic over a field is irreducible exactly when it has no root in that field (A polynomial of degree two or three over a field is irreducible exactly when it has no root in the field).
An integer is prime when it exceeds and has no positive divisors other than and itself (Prime and composite integers: is prime when and its only positive divisors are and ).
A divisor of a nonzero integer has absolute value at most the absolute value of that integer (If and then and ; hence the set of divisors of a nonzero integer is bounded above by ).
Integer absolute value is given by the positive and negative cases (The absolute value of an integer).
Integer absolute value is nonnegative and vanishes exactly at zero (Absolute value in : ; exactly when ; ; ; ; and exactly when ).
The integers form an ordered ring (The integers form a totally ordered ring).
The natural numbers embed in the integers preserving their arithmetic (The naturals embed in the integers).
The natural-number order is discrete (Discreteness: is the immediate successor).
The rational numbers form a field (The rationals form a field).
Verification
Facts [L3] through [L9] show that the positive divisors of are and the only positive divisor of is . Hence [L3] makes prime, and [L1] forces a reduced rational root to have denominator and numerator in the complete list .
Evaluating gives , respectively, so none is a root; [L10] supplies the field hypothesis and [L2] therefore makes the quadratic irreducible over .
The polynomial is irreducible over
Example
The polynomial is irreducible in .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The polynomial .
A quadratic over a field is irreducible exactly when it has no root in that field (A polynomial of degree two or three over a field is irreducible exactly when it has no root in the field).
The real numbers form an ordered field, so every square is nonnegative and (The reals form a totally ordered field).
Verification
For every real , [L2] gives and hence .
Thus has no real root, and [L1] makes it irreducible in .
Reduction modulo proves irreducible over
Example
The polynomial is irreducible in .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The primitive integer polynomial .
If a primitive integer polynomial has leading coefficient nonzero modulo a prime and its reduction is irreducible, then it is irreducible over (Irreducibility after reduction modulo a prime implies irreducibility over when the leading coefficient survives).
A cubic over a field is irreducible exactly when it has no root in the field (A polynomial of degree two or three over a field is irreducible exactly when it has no root in the field).
The ring is the quotient (For every , the congruence-class ring is the quotient ring ).
An integer is prime when it exceeds and has no positive divisors other than and itself (Prime and composite integers: is prime when and its only positive divisors are and ).
Integer divisors of a nonzero integer are bounded in absolute value (If and then and ; hence the set of divisors of a nonzero integer is bounded above by ).
Integer absolute value is defined by sign cases (The absolute value of an integer).
Integer absolute value is nonnegative and detects zero (Absolute value in : ; exactly when ; ; ; ; and exactly when ).
The integers form an ordered ring (The integers form a totally ordered ring).
Natural numbers embed in the integers preserving arithmetic (The naturals embed in the integers).
The natural order is discrete (Discreteness: is the immediate successor).
For prime , the ring is a field (For every prime , the two operations on make it a field).
Verification
Facts [L4] through [L10] show that is prime, so [L11] makes a field. Using [L3], reduction gives ; its values at the only residues and are both , so [L2] makes irreducible.
The leading coefficient survives modulo , and is primitive because it is monic, so [L1] proves that is irreducible over .
Eisenstein proves irreducible over for every positive
Example
For every positive natural number , the polynomial is irreducible in .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A natural number .
For every prime and positive , the polynomial is irreducible over (For every prime and positive , is irreducible over ).
An integer is prime when it exceeds and has no positive divisors other than and itself (Prime and composite integers: is prime when and its only positive divisors are and ).
A divisor of a nonzero integer is bounded in absolute value (If and then and ; hence the set of divisors of a nonzero integer is bounded above by ).
Integer absolute value is defined by sign cases (The absolute value of an integer).
Integer absolute value is nonnegative and detects zero (Absolute value in : ; exactly when ; ; ; ; and exactly when ).
The integers form an ordered ring (The integers form a totally ordered ring).
Natural numbers embed in the integers preserving arithmetic (The naturals embed in the integers).
The natural order is discrete (Discreteness: is the immediate successor).
Verification
Facts [L2] through [L8] verify that and that its only positive divisors are and , so is prime.
Apply [L1] with and the given positive to obtain the claimed irreducibility.
Translation turns into an Eisenstein polynomial
Example
The polynomial is irreducible over , although Eisenstein's criterion does not apply to it before a translation.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The polynomial and the substitution .
The universal property makes substitution a ring homomorphism; substitution is its inverse (Universal property of : a coefficient homomorphism and the image of determine a unique ring homomorphism).
Eisenstein's criterion proves a primitive integer polynomial irreducible over from the stated prime-divisibility conditions (Eisenstein criterion over the integers).
An integer is prime when it exceeds and has no positive divisors other than and itself (Prime and composite integers: is prime when and its only positive divisors are and ).
The rational numbers form a field (The rationals form a field).
Verification
No prime can make Eisenstein before translation, because the criterion would require that prime to divide the constant coefficient . A direct divisor check using [L3] shows that is prime. Binomial expansion gives . It is monic and hence primitive, and it is Eisenstein at : every nonleading coefficient is even, the leading coefficient is odd, and does not divide the constant coefficient . Thus [L2] makes irreducible.
Over the field [L4], [L1] makes an automorphism; a nontrivial factorization of would map to one of , so irreducibility of implies irreducibility of .
A degree-four polynomial can be reducible over without having a rational root
Statement refuted
A polynomial over a field is irreducible whenever it has no root in that field.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The polynomial .
A root is equivalent to divisibility by the corresponding linear polynomial (Factor theorem over a commutative ring).
The rational numbers form a field (The rationals form a field).
The rational numbers form an ordered field, so squares are nonnegative and positive constants remain positive when added (The rationals form a totally ordered field).
Counterexample
The displayed equality is a factorization in the field polynomial ring [L2] into two positive-degree nonunits, so is reducible.
For every rational , [L3] gives and , so and has no rational root; by [L1] it has no rational linear factor, yet step 1.1 shows it reducible.
In characteristic , has zero derivative and a repeated root
Example
In , the polynomial has repeated root and has formal derivative .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The quotient field and the polynomial .
A root is repeated exactly when it is also a root of the formal derivative (A root is repeated exactly when it is also a root of the formal derivative).
The power and Leibniz rules hold for formal derivatives over any commutative ring (Linearity, power rule, Leibniz rule and the degree bound for the formal derivative).
The ring is the quotient ring , so and (For every , the congruence-class ring is the quotient ring ).
An integer is prime when it exceeds and has no positive divisors other than and itself (Prime and composite integers: is prime when and its only positive divisors are and ).
For prime , the ring is a field (For every prime , the two operations on make it a field).
Verification
A direct divisor check using [L4] shows that is prime, so [L5] licenses the field . By [L3], and , so is a repeated root.
By [L2], in , so both and vanish, agreeing with the criterion [L1].
For a field , the ideal in is not principal
Statement refuted
If is a field, then every ideal of is principal.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A field , the iterated ring , and the ideal generated by and .
The bivariate polynomial ring is obtained by adjoining and then (Polynomial rings in finitely many commuting indeterminates by iteration).
A polynomial ring in finitely many indeterminates over a field is an integral domain (A polynomial ring in finitely many indeterminates over an integral domain is an integral domain).
The ideal generated by a set is the smallest ideal containing that set, and denotes the ideal generated by one element (The ideal generated by a subset and principal ideals).
Chosen images of the indeterminates determine evaluation homomorphisms (Universal property of : a coefficient homomorphism and the image of determine a unique ring homomorphism).
Counterexample
In a commutative ring the multiples of form an ideal containing and lie in every ideal containing , so [L3] identifies with the set of multiples of . Suppose for contradiction that ; since , the element divides both. Treating the ring as by [L1], degree in and the domain property [L2] show from that .
From , comparison of the leading coefficient in gives for some , so is a unit and is the whole ring.
Evaluation at exists by [L4] and has kernel an ideal containing , so [L3] gives inside that proper kernel; thus is proper, contradicting step 2.1, and is not principal.
Sources
Standard references
Recommended treatments; not extraction sources.
- Thomas W. Judson, Abstract Algebra: Theory and Applications, Chapter 17.1
- Thomas W. Judson, Abstract Algebra: Theory and Applications, Example 17.7
- Neil Donaldson, Math 120B Notes, Section 23
- Neil Donaldson, Math 120B Notes, Section 22, coefficient-ring caveats
- Neil Donaldson, Math 120B Notes, discussion after Theorem 23.14
- Neil Donaldson, Math 120B Notes, Section 23, root-bound counterexample
- Neil Donaldson, Math 120B Notes, Section 22, polynomial functions
- Thomas W. Judson, Abstract Algebra: Theory and Applications, examples after Theorem 17.8
- Neil Donaldson, Math 120B Notes, example after Theorem 23.13
- Keith Conrad, Irreducibility Tests in Q[T], Example 1.6
- Neil Donaldson, Math 120B Notes, translated Eisenstein example
- Neil Donaldson, Math 120B Notes, example after Theorem 23.8
- Brian Conrad, Differential Criterion and Primitivity, Section 1
- Thomas W. Judson, Abstract Algebra: Theory and Applications, Example 17.21