A note on a conjecture by Ulas on polynomial substitutions
Peter M\"uller

TL;DR
This paper proves a recent conjecture by Ulas concerning the reducibility of polynomial substitutions, contributing to the understanding of polynomial structure and substitution properties.
Contribution
It provides a proof for Ulas's conjecture on reducible polynomial substitutions, advancing theoretical knowledge in polynomial algebra.
Findings
Confirmed the conjecture's validity
Enhanced understanding of polynomial substitution reducibility
Contributed to algebraic theory of polynomial structures
Abstract
We prove a recent conjecture by Ulas on reducible polynomial substitutions.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
A note on a conjecture by Ulas on polynomial substitutions
Peter Müller
Institut für Mathematik
Universität Würzburg
97074 Würzburg
Germany
Abstract.
We prove a recent conjecture by Ulas on reducible polynomial substitutions.
We prove the following result, which was conjectured by Ulas in [2] and proven for there.
Theorem**.**
Let be an irreducible polynomial of degree over a field . Then there is a polynomial of degree such that is reducible over .
Proof.
Let be a root of in some extension of , and be the minimal polynomial of over . (So is, up to a non-zero factor from , the reciprocal of .) Since , and has degree over , we have for some of degree at most .
We obtain . So shares the root with the irreducible polynomial , thus divides . The degree of is at least , for otherwise would have degree at most over , contrary to .
The assertion now follows from and . ∎
Remark**.**
(a) Of course one can formulate the proof without reference to the algebraic element . Suppose without loss that is monic. Set and . Then is a polynomial, and divides . This example is similar to the one by Schinzel in [1, Lemma 10], which, as pointed out by Ulas [2, page 59], proves the theorem provided that does not divide the characteristic of .
(b) The answer to [2, Question 5.5], a kind of converse to the above theorem, is negative if by lack of irreducible polynomials of degree .
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] Andrzej Schinzel, On two theorems of Gelfond and some of their applications , Acta Arith 13 (1967/1968), 177–236.
- 2[2] Maciej Ulas, Is every irreducible polynomial reducible after a polynomial substitution? , J. Number Theory 202 (2019), 37–59.
