2024-07-21

685: Over Field, Polynomial and Nonzero Polynomial Divisor Have Unique Quotient and Remainder

<The previous article in this series | The table of contents of this series | The next article in this series>

description/proof of that over field, polynomial and nonzero polynomial divisor have unique quotient and remainder

Topics


About: ring

The table of contents of this article


Starting Context



Target Context


  • The reader will have a description and a proof of the proposition that over any field, any polynomial and any nonzero polynomial divisor have the unique quotient and remainder.

Orientation


There is a list of definitions discussed so far in this site.

There is a list of propositions discussed so far in this site.


Main Body


1: Structured Description


Here is the rules of Structured Description.

Entities:
F: { the fields }
F[x]: = the polynomials ring over F
p(x): F[x]
p(x): F[x], 0
//

Statements:
!q(x),r(x)F[x](deg(r(x))<deg(p(x))p(x)=p(x)q(x)+r(x)), where ! denotes unique existence
//


2: Natural Language Description


For any field, F, and the polynomials ring over F, F[x], any polynomial, p(x)F[x], and any nonzero polynomial, p(x)F[x] have the unique polynomials, q(x),r(x)F[x], such that deg(r(x))<deg(p(x)) and p(x)=p(x)q(x)+r(x).


3: Proof


Whole Strategy: Step 1: think of the case, deg(p(x))<deg(p(x)), and conclude the proposition for that case; Step 2: think of the case, deg(p(x))deg(p(x)) and conclude the proposition for that case.

In fact, the logics for the 2 cases are not essentially different, but the divisions of the cases ease our notations.

Let us suppose that p(x)=pmxm+...+p0 with pm0.

Step 1:

Let us suppose that deg(p(x))<deg(p(x)).

q(x)=0 is inevitable, because if q(x) had a term, qlxl, with ql0, p(x)q(x) would have the term, pmqlxm+l, which would be degree equal to or larger than m, but as the degree of p(x) was smaller than m, pmqlxm+l would have to be eliminated by r(x), but that would be impossible because r(x) could have only smaller-than-m-degree terms.

Then, inevitably, p(x)=p(x)0+r(x)=r(x).

So, q(x)=0,r(x)=p(x) is the unique solution.

Step 2:

Let us suppose that deg(p(x))deg(p(x)).

Step 2 Strategy: Step 2-1: suppose that p(x),q(x),r(x) have certain coefficients; Step 2-2: expand p(x)q(x)+r(x) and group the monomials by degrees; Step 2-3: compare the coefficients of p(x) and the coefficients of p(x)q(x)+r(x) and see that the coefficients of q(x) and r(x) are uniquely determined.

Step 2-1:

Let us suppose without loss of generality that p(x)=pnxn+...+p0, q(x)=qlxl+...+q0, and r(x)=rm1xm1+...+r0, with pn,ql0 but some leading coefficients of r(x) may be 0. The assumption is valid, because as deg(p(x))deg(p(x)), p(x)0, and also q(x)0, because p(x)=p(x)0+r(x)=r(x) is impossible.

Step 2-2:

p(x)q(x)+r(x)=(pmxm+...+p0)(qlxl+...+q0)+(rm1xm1+...+r0)=pmqlxm+l+(pmql1+pm1ql)xm+l1+...+(pmq0+pm1q1+...+pmlql)xm+(pm1q0+pm2q1+...+pm1lql+rm1)xm1+...+(p0q0+r0). Note, of course, if l=0, ql1 does not really exist, if m=0, pm1 does not really exist, etc., but as such case divisions would rather bother you than help you, the notation is left like that, assuming that you will understand what it means: the impossible terms are meant be just nonexistent. The notations hereafter are likewise.

Step 2-3:

Inevitably, n=m+l, and pn=pmql, which uniquely determines ql=pm1pn.

If n=m, ql=q0, and q(x) has been uniquely determined.

Otherwise, mn1, and we are going to look at pn1,...,pm in that order.

For pn1, inevitably, pn1=pmql1+pm1ql, which uniquely determines ql1=pm1(pn1pm1ql): ql has been already determined.

Let us suppose that we have looked at pn1,...,pn(j1) and have determined ql1,...,ql(j1), and let us look at pnj.

pnj=pmqlj+pm1qlj+1+...+pmjql. Inevitably, qlj=pm1(pnjpm1qlj+1...pmjql).

Note that the last pm corresponds to q0, because nj=m implies that lj=l+mn=0.

After all, ql,...,q0 have been uniquely determined.

If m=0, inevitably, r(x)=0.

Otherwise, 0m1, and we are going to look at pm1,...,p0 in that order.

For pm1, inevitably, pm1=pm1q0+pm2q1+...+pm1lql+rm1, and inevitably, rm1=pm1pm1q0pm2q1...pm1lql, which is uniquely determined.

Let us suppose that we have looked at pm1,...,pm(j1) and have determined rm1,...,rm(j1), and let us look at pmj.

Inevitably, pmj=pmjq0+pm(j+1)q1+...+pm(j+l)ql+rmj, which uniquely determines rmj=pmjpmjq0pm(j+1)q1...pm(j+l)ql.

Note that the last p0 corresponds to r0.

After all, rm1,...,r0 have been uniquely determined. Some or all of them can be 0.

p(x)=p(x)q(x)+r(x) indeed holds, because all the coefficients of the left hand side equal the corresponding coefficients of the right hand side.


4: Note


As an immediate corollary, when p(s)=0, p(x)=(xs)q(x), which means that p(x) can be divided by xs. That is because while p(x)=(xs)q(x)+r(x), r(x) is degree 0, so, r(x)=r, and p(s)=(ss)q(s)+r=r=0.


References


<The previous article in this series | The table of contents of this series | The next article in this series>