# Irreducible Polynomials in Finite Fields

I'm reading through some notes online concerning finite fields, and attempting to come up with a proof that all finite fields of the same size are isomorphic. But I'm getting stuck at a certain point, and I was wondering of you might have any hints.

If $F$ is any field with $p^d$ elements and $m(x)$ has coefficients all from $\mathbb{F}_p$ and is an irreducible polynomial of degree $d$ over $\mathbb{F}_p$, then $m(x)$ has roots in $F$. Is this immediately obvious? It seems to be stated so but I can't see why.

-
The situation is even slightly better; two finite fields of the same cardinal are in fact equal inside a fixed algebraic closure. –  vgty6h7uij Jul 26 '12 at 9:34
Hint: Set $q = p^{d}.$ Then every element $f \in F$ satisfies $f^{q} = f$ (consider non-zero $f$ and use a little elementary group theory). –  Geoff Robinson Jul 26 '12 at 11:13

This is false as stated (ie without some clarification) for all $d>1$. If $m(x)$ is irreducible over $\mathbb{F}_{p^d}$, then it cannot be factored into a product of two polynomials of positive degree. Thus it cannot have any roots in $F$ unless the polynomial is linear, which contradicts the assumption that $d>1$. This has been fixed in an edit.

On the other hand, if you're working over $\mathbb{F}_p$ and $m(x)$ has coefficients all from $\mathbb{F}_p$ and is irreducible over $\mathbb{F}_p$, then the statement is true. Unfortunately, I cannot think of a reason right now why this is true without appealing to the result you are trying to prove.

A different avenue of proof may be the following, if you're familiar with a theorem about splitting fields:

Theorem: Any two splitting fields of a fixed polynomial over a ground field $F$ are isomorphic.

Proof: Exercise.

If you can show that every field of characteristic $p$ contains a subfield isomorphic to $\mathbb{F}_p$ and find a polynomial over $\mathbb{F}_p$ which has exactly $p^n$ distinct roots and find a clever use for the above theorem, you will have a proof.

-
I fixed my question. I agree, it was unclear as stated. –  Sam Lane Jul 26 '12 at 9:47
{"extraction_info": {"found_math": true, "script_math_tex": 0, "script_math_asciimath": 0, "math_annotations": 0, "math_alttext": 0, "mathml": 0, "mathjax_tag": 0, "mathjax_inline_tex": 1, "mathjax_display_tex": 0, "mathjax_asciimath": 0, "img_math": 0, "codecogs_latex": 0, "wp_latex": 0, "mimetex.cgi": 0, "/images/math/codecogs": 0, "mathtex.cgi": 0, "katex": 0, "math-container": 0, "wp-katex-eq": 0, "align": 0, "equation": 0, "x-ck12": 0, "texerror": 0, "math_score": 0.9018036723136902, "perplexity": 83.28578023559542}, "config": {"markdown_headings": true, "markdown_code": true, "boilerplate_config": {"ratio_threshold": 0.18, "absolute_threshold": 10, "end_threshold": 15, "enable": true}, "remove_buttons": true, "remove_image_figures": true, "remove_link_clusters": true, "table_config": {"min_rows": 2, "min_cols": 3, "format": "plain"}, "remove_chinese": true, "remove_edit_buttons": true, "extract_latex": true}, "warc_path": "s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2015-18/segments/1429246652114.13/warc/CC-MAIN-20150417045732-00050-ip-10-235-10-82.ec2.internal.warc.gz"}