Table of Contents
Fetching ...

A Goldbach theorem for Laurent series semidomains

Nathan Kaplan, Harold Polo

TL;DR

This paper develops a Goldbach-type framework for Laurent polynomials and Laurent series over additively reduced, additively atomic semidomains. It shows that the key condition $\mathcal{A}_{+}(S)=S^{\times}$ is equivalent to every non-monomial Laurent polynomial being expressible as a sum of two multiplicative irreducibles, and it further characterizes the precise exceptional forms that resist such decompositions. Extending to Laurent series, the authors prove an analogous three-irreducible decomposition result, and demonstrate that non-polynomial Laurent series admit uncountably many representations as sums of three irreducibles. The results generalize prior work in the area and, in particular, recover and extend known two-irreducible decompositions for multivariate Laurent polynomials over $\mathbb{N}$, while revealing a richly non-unique decompositional structure for Laurent series.

Abstract

A semidomain is a subsemiring of an integral domain. One can think of a semidomain as an integral domain in which additive inverses are no longer required. A semidomain $S$ is additively reduced if $0$ is the only invertible element of the monoid $(S,+)$, while $S$ is additively atomic if the monoid $(S,+)$ is atomic (i.e., every non-invertible element $s \in S$ can be written as the sum of finitely many irreducibles of $(S,+)$). In this paper, we describe the additively reduced and additively atomic semidomains $S$ for which every Laurent series $f \in S[[x^{\pm 1} ]]$ that is not a monomial can be written as the sum of at most three multiplicative irreducibles. In particular, we show that, for each $k \in \mathbb{N}$, every polynomial $f \in \mathbb{N}[x_1^{\pm 1}, \ldots, x_k^{\pm 1}]$ that is not a monomial can be written as the sum of two multiplicative irreducibles provided that $f(1, \ldots, 1) > 3$.

A Goldbach theorem for Laurent series semidomains

TL;DR

This paper develops a Goldbach-type framework for Laurent polynomials and Laurent series over additively reduced, additively atomic semidomains. It shows that the key condition is equivalent to every non-monomial Laurent polynomial being expressible as a sum of two multiplicative irreducibles, and it further characterizes the precise exceptional forms that resist such decompositions. Extending to Laurent series, the authors prove an analogous three-irreducible decomposition result, and demonstrate that non-polynomial Laurent series admit uncountably many representations as sums of three irreducibles. The results generalize prior work in the area and, in particular, recover and extend known two-irreducible decompositions for multivariate Laurent polynomials over , while revealing a richly non-unique decompositional structure for Laurent series.

Abstract

A semidomain is a subsemiring of an integral domain. One can think of a semidomain as an integral domain in which additive inverses are no longer required. A semidomain is additively reduced if is the only invertible element of the monoid , while is additively atomic if the monoid is atomic (i.e., every non-invertible element can be written as the sum of finitely many irreducibles of ). In this paper, we describe the additively reduced and additively atomic semidomains for which every Laurent series that is not a monomial can be written as the sum of at most three multiplicative irreducibles. In particular, we show that, for each , every polynomial that is not a monomial can be written as the sum of two multiplicative irreducibles provided that .
Paper Structure (7 sections, 14 theorems, 17 equations)

This paper contains 7 sections, 14 theorems, 17 equations.

Key Result

Lemma 3.1

Let $f = \sum_{i = 0}^{n} s_ix^{k_i} \in S[x^{\pm 1}]$ such that $|\mathsf{supp}(f)| > 1$. Then $f$ is multiplicative irreducible in $S[x^{\pm 1}]$ if and only if $f$ is monolithic and $1 \in \gcd(s_0, \ldots, s_n)$.

Theorems & Definitions (31)

  • Definition 2.1
  • Lemma 3.1
  • proof
  • Lemma 3.2
  • proof
  • Lemma 3.3
  • proof
  • Lemma 3.4
  • proof
  • Lemma 3.5
  • ...and 21 more