1

I am aware that $t^5-t-1$ is unsolvable, but the proof I have seen involves a theorem linking its Galois group with the Galois group of its reduction mod $p$. If I wish to have a simpler proof (that does not invoke that theorem), is there another quintic with only one real root that can be easily shown to be unsolvable?

For comparison, there is an elementary proof that $t^5-6t+3$ is unsolvable. In particular, it has $3$ real roots and so complex conjugation immediately furnishes a swap in the Galois group $G$. And $G$ acts transitively on the roots $R$, so letting $c{∈}R$ we have that $\{ \ (g,g(c)) : g{∈}G \ \}$ is a $k$-to-$1$ relation for some $k{∈}ℕ^+$, because for any $x,y{∈}R$ we have $h(x) = y$ for some $h{∈}G$ and so $\{ \ g : g{∈}G ∧ g(c) = x \ \}$ $= \{ \ g : g{∈}G ∧ (hg)(c) = y \ \}$ $= \{ \ h^{-1}g' : g'{∈}G ∧ g'(c) = y \ \}$, which is in obvious bijection with $= \{ \ g : g{∈}G ∧ g(c) = y \ \}$, and hence $\#(G) = k·\#(R)$ since for any $x{∈}R$ we have $i(c) = x$ for some $i{∈}G$. Thus $5 = \#(R) \mid \#(G)$. Since $5$ is prime, $G$ has a $5$-cycle (on $R$) by Cauchy's theorem. The swap and $5$-cycle imply that $G$ is isomorphic to $S_5$.

Is there any explicit unsolvable quintic with equally simple proof, and how small coefficients can you get? I know this is a bit subjective, but I'm simply asking for examples that don't need algebraic number theory.

user21820
  • 60,745
  • Both Galois and Abel dealt with irreducible polynomials of prime degree and reached the conclusion that such a polynomial is solvable if and only if any root of the polynomial can be expressed as a rational function of two roots. The criterion can not be used if the quintic has only one real root. – Paramanand Singh Aug 26 '24 at 01:07
  • @ParamanandSingh: I can't figure out what you mean. Are you giving an additional answer? – user21820 Aug 28 '24 at 12:29
  • Not an additional answer, but just analyzing the nature of roots (real VS non-real) won't help in all cases. Using the theorem in my previous comment one can deduce if an irreducible solvable polynomial of prime degree has at least two real roots then all roots must be real. But if it has only one real root, then one can't really figure out solvability just by the nature of the roots. – Paramanand Singh Aug 28 '24 at 19:30
  • @ParamanandSingh: I think you have misunderstood the question. I am asking for either: (1) An explicit unsolvable quintic with one real root, that is as simple to analyze as possible. So you are free to find an extremely special quintic if that makes your job easier, even if it is purely by luck. (2) An explanation for why for every unsolvable quintic with one real root there cannot be an essentially easier method than using the sextic resolvent to prove it unsolvable. – user21820 Aug 29 '24 at 13:23

2 Answers2

3

Not a solution, just fleshing out my comments explaining, why I think this is difficult.


In the case of an irreducible quintic over $\Bbb{Q}$ we expect the Galois group $G$ to be $S_5$, but to prove it we need to rule out the possibilities that $G$ might be a subgroup of either $A_5$ or $F_{20}\simeq C_5\rtimes C_4$. The discriminant is the tailormade tool to cover the first alternative. If we are in the latter case, the sextic resolvent has a rational root, so that is the tool. As that was deemed unsatisfactory, this is a dead end.


For a different approach I considered the possibility that may be two quintics, $f(x)$ and $g(x)$ from $\Bbb{Q}[x]$, could share the same splitting field $L\subseteq \Bbb{C}$, hence also the Galois group, but still $f$ would have three real roots and $g$ only one. In such a case the simple argument using $f$ shows that $Gal(L/\Bbb{Q})\simeq S_5$, and $g$ would be an example fitting OP's criteria.

Unfortunately this is impossible. Basically because $G=S_5$ has a unique conjugacy class of subgroups of index five, namely the point stabilizers of $G$ as permutations of the set of roots $\{\alpha_1,\alpha_2,\alpha_3,\alpha_4,\alpha_5\}$ of $f$. By Galois correspondence the fields $K_i:=\Bbb{Q}(\alpha_i)$ are then the only intermediate fields of degree five over $\Bbb{Q}$.

If $\beta\in L$ is a real root of $g(x)$, then $[\Bbb{Q}(\beta):\Bbb{Q}]=5$, and our earlier observation implies that $$\Bbb{Q}(\beta)=K_j$$ for some $j\in\{1,2,3,4,5\}$ such that $\alpha_j\in L\cap \Bbb{R}$. It follows that $$\beta=r(\alpha_j)$$ for some at most quartic polynomial $r(x)\in\Bbb{Q}[x]$. Because all the automorphisms in $G$ fix the rationals, the five Galois conjugates of $\beta$ are $$ \beta_i=r(\alpha_i),\ i=1,2,3,4,5. $$ Alas, three of those are real, meaning that the polynomial $g(x)$ necessarily also has three real roots.

Jyrki Lahtonen
  • 140,891
  • I think it is at least a partial answer. I will temporarily accept it unless someone else provides a more complete answer. I understand that the question I am asking is a difficult one, and I'm glad that you actually appreciate its difficulty, so I don't really expect that much anyway. – user21820 Aug 25 '24 at 08:08
1

Another simple example is $f = x^5 + 2x + 2$ over $\Bbb Q$.
By Eisenstein, $f$ is irreducible over $\Bbb Q$. It has exactly one real root, namely $x \approx -0.817471019001$. Furthermore it has the Galois group $S_5$, which is not solvable.

The proof is as easy as it can be for this case. One can avoid the modulo $p$ reduction and use the resolvent instead, see the reference below.

Of course the case with exactly $2$ non-real roots is still the most basic one. It only requires Cauchy's theorem, and that the symmetric group $S_n$ can be generated by a transposition $(12)$ and an $n$-cycle $(123\cdots n)$.

Reference and proofs:

Is this Galois Group is isomorphic to $S_5$

Prem
  • 14,696
Dietrich Burde
  • 140,055
  • I cannot believe you consider the resolvent method "equally simple". Is there no other way? – user21820 Jun 18 '24 at 09:26
  • 2
    No, there is no other way, without using some some standard argument concerning Galois groups. It depends on your prerequisites, whether or not you find this "simple". I find it appropriate, and also think that the reduction modulo $p$ argument is "simple enough". Why do you want to avoid it? – Dietrich Burde Jun 18 '24 at 12:41
  • I consider the proof that the reduction-mod-prime lemma works not sufficiently "simple". I would be extremely surprised if there is absolutely no simple example with one real root, because I would have thought that there would be some trick that works with only very special cases. I do understand that "standard" methods cannot be simpler, but I honestly believed that "tricks" may be able to deal with some really special polynomials. – user21820 Jun 18 '24 at 15:46
  • @user21820 I removed my other comments because my take is that the Frobenius automorphisms (mod $p$ as well as mod $\infty$ when it is the complex conjugation) are the tricks. Both are based on the facts that the Galois theory of both the finite fields as well as $\Bbb{R}$ can be easily described. And they have implications over number fields (or function fields over a finite field). A lot of algebraic number theory is, in a sense, based on those tricks, but their applicability elsewhere is limited. – Jyrki Lahtonen Jul 09 '24 at 04:19
  • @JyrkiLahtonen: Consider the following idea: Suppose we construct a quintic that has 3 real roots but whose roots have some special relation that can be captured by a quintic that has only 1 real root. Then it may be possible to show that if we can solve the second quintic then we can solve the first quintic. My question is, can you actually know for sure that such an idea can never work, and that all other ad-hoc ideas will also fail? Thanks! =) – user21820 Jul 09 '24 at 08:29