Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26
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.

tn−1 is separable over K exactly when the characteristic does not divide n, and then a splitting field carries n distinct n-th roots of unity

Statement

Let K be a field and n≥1. Then

tn−1 is separable over K⟺char⁡K∤n

(Repeated roots in extension fields and separable polynomials, The characteristic of a ring: the least n≥1 with n⋅1R=0 when one exists, and 0 otherwise; divisibility of integers being that of Divisibility in Z: d∣a when a=dq for some integer q, under which 0∣n holds only for n=0, so characteristic 0 never divides n≥1).

When char⁡K∤n and E is a splitting field of tn−1 over K, the group μn(E) is cyclic of order exactly n, it contains exactly φ(n) primitive n-th roots of unity, and

E=K(ζ)

for every primitive n-th root of unity ζ∈E.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A field K, an integer n≥1, the polynomial f:=tn−1∈K[t], and the element n⋅1K obtained by adding 1K to itself n times.

[L1]

f′=∑i≥1iaixi−1 for f=∑iaixi (The formal derivative of a polynomial); (xk)′=kxk−1 for k≥1 and constants have derivative 0, and the derivative is additive (Linearity, power rule, Leibniz rule and the degree bound for the formal derivative). Hence f′=(n⋅1K) tn−1.

[L2]

For a field F and 0≠f∈F[x]: f is separable over F if and only if gcd⁡(f,f′)=1 in F[x] (A nonzero polynomial over a field is separable exactly when its gcd with its derivative is 1).

[L3]

For f,g∈F[x] not both zero, d=gcd⁡(f,g) is monic, divides both f and g, and every common divisor of f and g divides d (Bézout identity and the Euclidean algorithm for polynomials over a field).

[L5]

Every nonzero f∈K[x] has a splitting field over K (Every nonzero polynomial over a field has a splitting field); f of degree m splits over E when f=c∏j=1m(t−αj) with c∈K× and αj∈E, repetitions allowed, and a splitting field is generated over K by the roots (Polynomials that split and splitting fields of a polynomial or a family of polynomials), the notation K(S) for the subfield generated by K and a finite set S being that of Finitely generated field extensions F(a1,…,ar).

[L6]

μn(F) is a finite cyclic subgroup of F× of order dividing n; it contains a primitive n-th root of unity exactly when its order is n, and there are then φ(n) of them, namely the generators (μn(K) is cyclic of order dividing n, and has a primitive n-th root of unity exactly when its order is n, The group μn(K) of n-th roots of unity in a field, and primitive n-th roots of unity, The unit group (Z/n)× and Euler's totient φ(n)=∣(Z/n)×∣ for n≥1).

[L7]

f is separable over K when it has no repeated root in any extension field of K, where a is a repeated root of f in E when (t−a)2 divides the image of f in E[t] (Repeated roots in extension fields and separable polynomials).

Proof

technique · cases
1.1assume-case posL1L2L3

In the case n⋅1K≠0, put d:=gcd⁡(f,f′). By [L1] f′=(n⋅1K)tn−1 with n⋅1K a unit of K, so d∣tn−1 by [L3], hence d∣t⋅tn−1=tn; and d∣f=tn−1, so d divides tn−(tn−1)=1 and, being monic, d=1. By [L2] the polynomial f is separable over K.

1.2assume-case zeroL1L2L3

In the case n⋅1K=0, [L1] gives f′=0, so every polynomial dividing f is a common divisor of f and f′; by [L3] the monic gcd⁡(f,0) is divisible by every such divisor and divides f, so it is f itself, of degree n≥1. Thus gcd⁡(f,f′)≠1 and f is not separable over K by [L2].

2.1step 1.1step 1.2L4cases-exhaustive

The two cases are exhaustive and, by [L4], n⋅1K≠0 says exactly char⁡K∤n; so f is separable over K if and only if char⁡K∤n.

3.1step 2.1L5

Assume now char⁡K∤n and let E be a splitting field of f over K, which exists by [L5]. Over E one has f=c∏j=1n(t−αj) with αj∈E, and comparing leading coefficients of the monic f gives c=1.

4.1step 2.1step 3.1L7

The αj are pairwise distinct: if αi=αj for i≠j then (t−αi)2 divides f in E[t], making αi a repeated root of f in the extension E of K, which contradicts the separability supplied by step 2.1 through [L7].

5.1step 3.1step 4.1L6

Hence f has exactly n distinct roots in E, that is ∣μn(E)∣=n; by [L6] the group μn(E) is cyclic of order n and contains exactly φ(n) primitive n-th roots of unity.

6.1step 5.1L5L6∎

Fix such a ζ. Every root of f in E lies in μn(E)=⟨ζ⟩, so is a power of ζ; since E is generated over K by those roots by [L5], E=K(ζ). At n=1 the polynomial is t−1, μ1(E)={1}, φ(1)=1, ζ=1 and E=K.

Remarks

  • The failing direction is inseparability, not a shortage of roots. When char⁡K=p divides n, the derivative vanishes identically and no extension can separate the roots: writing n=pkm with p∤m, one has μn=μm in every field of characteristic p (In characteristic p the only pk-th root of unity is 1, and tpk−1=(t−1)pk). Passing to a larger field does not help, which is why the hypothesis is carried on every later statement rather than removed by enlarging K.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

66 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.

Sources