54
$\begingroup$

The polynomial $f(x)=1+x+\frac{x^2}2+\dots+\frac{x^n}{n!}$ often appears in algebra textbooks as an illustration for using derivative to test for multiple roots.

Recently, I stumbled upon Example 2.1.6 in Prasolov's book Polynomials (Springer, 2004), where it is shown that this polynomial is irreducible using Eisenstein's criterion and Bertrand's postulate. However, I do not think the argument is correct. Below you can find the argument presented in the book -- I do not see how Eisenstein is applicable here, since we do not know $p\mid n$. And if we are using Eisenstein's criterion directly to the polynomial $n!f(x)$, this is one of the coefficients that would have to be divisible by $p$. (However, the argument works at least if $n$ is prime.)

So my main question is about the irreducibility of the original polynomial, but I also wonder whether Prasolov's proof can be corrected somehow. To summarize:

  • Is the polynomial $f(x)=1+x+\frac{x^2}2+\dots+\frac{x^n}{n!}$ irreducible over $\mathbb Q$?
  • Is the Prasolov's proof correct or can it be easily corrected? (Did I miss something there?)

Here is the (whole) Example 2.1.6 from Prasolov's book. The same example is given in прасолов: многочлены(Prasolov: Mnogochleny; 2001,MCCME).

Example 2.1.6. For any positive integer $n$, the polynomial $f(x)=1+x+\frac{x^2}2+\dots+\frac{x^n}{n!}$ is irreducible.

Proof: We have to prove that the polynomial $n!f(x)=x^n+nx^{n-1}+n(n-1)x^{n-2}+\dots+n!$ is irreducible over $\mathbb Z$. To this end, it suffices to find the prime $p$ such that $n!$ is divisible by $p$ but is not divisible by $p^2$, i.e., p \le n < 2p.

Let $n = 2m$ or $n = 2m + 1$. Bertrand's postulate states that there exists a prime p such that m < p \le 2m.

For $n = 2m$, the inequalities p \le n < 2p are obvious. For $n = 2m + 1$, we obtain the inequalities $p \le n-1$ and n-1 < 2p. But in this case the number $n-1$ is even, and hence the inequality n-1 < 2p implies n < 2p. It is also clear that p \le n - 1 < n. $\hspace{20pt}\square$

  • 0
    Related post on MO: [Irreducible polynomial $p_{n}(x)=\sum_{k=0}^n\frac{x^k}{k!}$ for all positive integers $n$](http://mathoverflow.net/questions/240039/irreducible-polynomial-p-nx-sum-k-0n-dfracxkk-for-all-positive)2016-05-30

1 Answers 1

7

"since we do not know p∣n."

I will take Keith's word for it that the argument, overall, is bogus.

However, please note that the condition Prasolov identifies as desired is

$ p | n! , $ but not $ p^2 | n! . $

If $p \leq n,$ then $ n! = 1 \cdot 2 \cdot \cdots (p-1) \cdot p \cdot (p+1) \cdots n, $ so indeed $p | n!.$

If $2p \leq n,$ then $ n! = 1 \cdot 2 \cdots (p-1) \cdot p \cdot (p+1) \cdots (2p-1) \cdot (2p) \cdot (2p+1) \cdots n, $ so $p^2 | n!.$

If $p \leq n < 2 p,$ then $n!$ is divisible by $p$ but not by $p^2.$

EDIT: it is clear from comments that Martin was considering the entire Eisenstein argument, meaning that it is not enough to know the behavior of the last coefficient $n!.$ I did not have the Prasolov book in front of me and was late for an appointment, so I reacted strictly to the excerpt I saw on this site.

  • 1
    I've tried to edit my question a little, to be more clear. I should have done so already when posting it. (But I think your answer + comments below it do a better job in clarifying my intentions.) I am grateful for your answer and for your time.2012-04-13