Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The polynomial P = x 4 + 1 is irreducible over Q but not over any finite field. On any field extension of F 2, P = (x + 1) 4. On every other finite field, at least one of −1, 2 and −2 is a square, because the product of two non-squares is a square and so we have; If =, then = (+) ().
A polynomial has a square root if and only if all exponents of the square-free decomposition are even. In this case, a square root is obtained by dividing these exponents by 2. Thus the problem of deciding if a polynomial has a square root, and of computing it if it exists, is a special case of square-free factorization.
If one of these values is 0, we have a linear factor. If the values are nonzero, we can list the possible factorizations for each. Now, 2 can only factor as 1×2, 2×1, (−1)×(−2), or (−2)×(−1). Therefore, if a second degree integer polynomial factor exists, it must take one of the values p(0) = 1, 2, −1, or −2. and likewise for p(-1
For example, 3 × 5 is an integer factorization of 15, and (x – 2)(x + 2) is a polynomial factorization of x 2 – 4. Factorization is not usually considered meaningful within number systems possessing division , such as the real or complex numbers , since any x {\displaystyle x} can be trivially written as ( x y ) × ( 1 / y ) {\displaystyle ...
For example, to factor =, the first try for a is the square root of 5959 rounded up to the next integer, which is 78. Then b 2 = 78 2 − 5959 = 125 {\displaystyle b^{2}=78^{2}-5959=125} . Since 125 is not a square, a second try is made by increasing the value of a by 1.
Hensel's original lemma concerns the relation between polynomial factorization over the integers and over the integers modulo a prime number p and its powers. It can be straightforwardly extended to the case where the integers are replaced by any commutative ring, and p is replaced by any maximal ideal (indeed, the maximal ideals of have the form , where p is a prime number).
The factorizations are often not unique in the sense that the unit could be absorbed into any other factor with exponent equal to one. The entry 4+2i = −i(1+i) 2 (2+i), for example, could also be written as 4+2i= (1+i) 2 (1−2i). The entries in the table resolve this ambiguity by the following convention: the factors are primes in the right ...
A perfect 1-factorization (P1F) of a graph is a 1-factorization having the property that every pair of 1-factors is a perfect pair. A perfect 1-factorization should not be confused with a perfect matching (also called a 1-factor). In 1964, Anton Kotzig conjectured that every complete graph K 2n where n ≥ 2 has a