Analytic Solutions To Algebraic Equations

Analytic Solutions to
Algebraic Equations
Mathematics
Tomas Johansson
LiTH–MAT–Ex–98–13
Supervisor: Bengt Ove Turesson

Examiner: Bengt Ove Turesson
Linköping 1998-06-12
CONTENTS 1
Contents
1 Introduction 3
2 Quadratic, cubic, and quartic equations 5

2.1 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2 Solving third and fourth degree equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3 Tschirnhaus transformations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3 Solvability of algebraic equations 13

3.1 History of the quintic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.2 Galois theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.3 Solvable groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.4 Solvability by radicals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
4 Elliptic functions 25
4.1 General theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
4.2 The Weierstrass ℘ function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
4.3 Solving the quintic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
4.4 Theta functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
4.5 History of elliptic functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
5 Hermite’s and Gordan’s solutions to the quintic 39

5.1 Hermite’s solution to the quintic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
5.2 Gordan’s solutions to the quintic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
6 Kiepert’s algorithm for the quintic 43

6.1 An algorithm for solving the quintic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
6.2 Commentary about Kiepert’s algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
7 Conclusion 51
7.1 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
A Groups 53
B Permutation groups 54
C Rings 54
D Polynomials 55
References 57
2 CONTENTS
3
1 Introduction
In this report, we study how one solves general polynomial equations using only the coef-
ficients of the polynomial. Almost everyone who has taken some course in algebra knows
that Galois proved that it is impossible to solve algebraic equations of degree five or higher,
using only radicals. What is not so generally known is that it is possible to solve such equa-
tions in another way, namely using techniques from the theory of elliptic functions. Galois
theory and the theory of elliptic functions are both extensive and deep. But to understand
and find a way of solving polynomial equations we do not need all this theory. The aim
here is to pick out only the part of the theory which is necessary to understand why not all
equations are solvable by radicals, and the alternative procedures by which we solve them.
We will concentrate on finding an algorithm for the quintic equation.
In Chapter 2 we examine the history of polynomial equations. We also present the
formulas for solutions to equations of degree less then five. A basic tool, the Tschirnhaus
transformation, is introduced. These transformations are used to simplify the solution
process by transforming a polynomial into another where some coefficients are zero.
In Chapter 3 we introduce some Galois theory. In Galois theory one examines the rela-
tionship between the permutation group of the roots and a field containing the coefficients
of the polynomial. Here we present only as much theory as is necessary to understand why
not all polynomial equations are solvable by radicals. The history of the quintic equation
is also presented.
In Chapter 4 we introduce the elliptic functions and examine their basic properties. We
concentrate on one specific elliptic function, namely the Weierstrass ℘ function. We show
that with the help of this function one can solve the quintic equation. However, this is just
a theoretical possibility. To be able to get a practical algorithm, we need to know some
facts about theta functions, with which we also deal in this chapter. The history of elliptic
functions is included at the end of this chapter. Here we also present the general formula for
solving any polynomial equation due to H. Umemura. This formula is also only of theoretical
value, so we will look at other ways of solving the quintic. We present three such methods
in the last chapter. The one that we will concentrate on is Kiepert’s, because it uses both
elliptic functions and Tschirnhaus transformations in a clear and straightforward way.
In Chapter 5 we present two algorithms for solving the quintic, which are due to Hermite
and Gordan. Hermite uses a more analytic method compared with Gordan’s solution, which
involves the use of the icosahedron.
In Chapter 6 we present Kiepert’s algorithm for the quintic. This lends itself to imple-
mentation on a computer. This has in fact been done by B. King and R. Canfield, and at
the end of the chapter we discuss their results.
We conclude with an Appendix. Here one can find the most basic facts about groups,
rings, and polynomials.
Acknowledgment
I would like to thank the following people: my supervisor Bengt Ove Turesson for helping me
with this report and for teaching me LATEX 2ε in which this report is written, Peter Hackman
for helpfull hints about Galois theory, and Gunnar Fogelberg for historical background. I
also thank Thomas Karlsson who told me that this examination work was available, and
Bruce King for telling me about his work on the quintic. I also express my gratitude to John
H. Conway, Keith Dennis, and William C. Waterhouse for giving me information about L.
Kiepert.
4 1 INTRODUCTION
5
2 Quadratic, cubic, and quartic equations

In this chapter we shall take a brief look at the history of equations of degree less than
five. We will also study the techniques for solving these equations. One such technique, the
Tschirnhaus transformation, will be examined in Section 2.3.
2.1 History
Polynomial equations arise quite naturally in mathematics, when dealing with basic math-
ematical problems, and so their study has a long history. The attempts to solve certain of
these equations have lead to new and exciting theories in mathematics, with the result that
polynomial equations has been an important cornerstone in the development to modern
mathematics.
It is known that in ancient Babylonia (2000 – 600 B.C.), one was able to solve the second
order equation
x2 + c1 x + c0 = 0, ci ∈ R,
using the famous formula

r
c1 c21
x=− ± − c0 .
2 4
They could, of course, not deal with all of the roots, since they did not have access to the
complex numbers. Archaeologists have found tablets with cuneiform signs, where problems
concerning second order equations are dealt with. Starting with geometric problems, they
were led to these equations by the Pythagorean theorem. The Babylonians also studied
some special equations of third degree.
The Greeks (600 B.C. – 300 A.D.) had a more geometric viewpoint of mathematics
compared to the Babylonians, but they also considered second order equations. They made
geometric solutions to the quadratic and constructed the segment x from known segments
c0 and c1 .
Problems like trisecting an angle and doubling the volume of the cube led the Greeks
to third degree equations which they tried to solve; but they had no general method to for
solving such equations.
The Hindus (600 B.C. – 1000 A.D.) invented the number zero, negative numbers, and
the position system. Brahmagupta dealt with quadratic equations. The solutions were
more algebraic than those of the Babylonians.
The Arabs (500 B.C. – 1000 A.D.) enjoyed algebra. The famous al-Khwarizmi dealt
with algebra in his book Al-jabr wa’l muqabala around 800 A.D. In this book, he exam-
ined certain types of second order equations (and none of higher degree). Another Arab
mathematician, Omar Khayyam (1048–1131) classified third degree equations and exam-
ined their roots in some special cases. He also investigated equations of fourth degree.
Fore more details about mathematics in these old cultures, see Boyer [2] and van der Waer-
den [25].
Europe began to participate in the development of mathematics soon after the Arabs.
The Italian Leonardo Fibonacci (1170–1250) wrote Liber Abacci, where he tried to solve
quadratic equations in one or more variables.
In Europe in the Middle Ages, competitions in mathematics were popular. This en-
couraged the development of the art of solving equations. A new era began around the
6 2 QUADRATIC, CUBIC, AND QUARTIC EQUATIONS
beginning of the fifteenth centuary in Italy, when Scipione del Ferro (1465–1526) succeeded
in solving the equation
x3 + c1 x + c0 = 0.
In Section 2.3, we will show that every third degree equation can be transformed to the above
form, which means that del Ferro had solved the general cubic equation. Before his death,
del Ferro told his student Fior of his method for solving cubics. Fior challenged another
Italian, Niccolo Tartaglia (1500–1557), to a mathematical duel. This forced Tartaglia, who
knew that Fior could solve such equations, to find a general method for solving the cubic.
Tartaglia succeded with this and thus won the competition.
Tartaglia told Girolamo Cardano (1501–1576) about his method. Cardano published
the method in his book Ars Magna (around 1540). Here he observed that, in certain
cases, the method yields roots of negative numbers, and that these could be real numbers.
This means that he was touching upon the complex numbers. Cardano made his student
Lodovico Ferrari (1522–1565) solve the fourth degree equation, i.e., the quartic. Ferrari
succeeded with this, and Cardano also published this method in Ars Magna.
The case when Cardanos formulas lead to roots of negative numbers was studied by
Rafael Bombelli (1526–1573) in his book Algebra in 1560.
After the Italians, many famous mathematicians examined these equations, for example
Francois Viète (1540–1603) and Ehrenfried Walter von Tschirnhaus (1651–1708).
It was finally the German mathematician Gottfried von Leibniz (1646–1716) who, with-
out any geometry, verified these formulas.
More information about these Italians and the solutions to third and fourth degree
equations can be found in Stillwell [24].
2.2 Solving third and fourth degree equations

Below we shall present the formulas for the solution of cubic and quartic equations. When
solving the second order equation, we just complete the square and get the formula immedi-
ately. The formulas for the third and fourth degree equations are a little bit more difficult.
One learns the second order formula in high school, and one might wonder why we do not
also learn these other formulas. They are not too difficult to remember, but the problem
with them is that, in some cases, one has to take roots of negative numbers, even though
the equation has real solutions.
Take an arbitrary third degree equation:
x3 + c2 x2 + c1 x + c0 = 0, ci ∈ C. (1)
We will use cube roots of unity. Therefore let
w = cos 2π 2π
3 + i sin 3 .
If we make the substitution

c2
x=y− ,
3
(in the next section we will show how we find substitutions like that), then we get an
equation in y :
y 3 + a1 y + a0 = 0.
2.2 Solving third and fourth degree equations 7
√
If a0 = 0, then this equation has roots y = 0 and y = ± −a1 . Consequently,
c2 √ c2
x=− or x = ± −a1 − ;
3 3
if a1 = 0, then we get the roots
√ c2 √ c2 √ c2
x= 3
−a0 − , x = w 3 −a0 − and x = w 2 3 −a0 − .
3 3 3
If a0 a1 6= 0, then we make the substitution
a1
y=z− .
3z
This substitution gives us an equation in z of the form
a31 a31
z 3 + a0 − ⇒ z 6 + a0 z 3 − = 0,
27z 3 27
which can be factorized as follows:
Ã Ã r !! Ã Ã r !!
3 a0 a20 a31 3 a0 a20 a31
z + + + z + − + = 0.
2 4 27 2 4 27
Theorem 2.1 Both parentheses in the expression

Ã Ã r !! Ã Ã r !!
3 a0 a20 a31 3 a0 a20 a31
z + + + z + − + = 0,
2 4 27 2 4 27
give the same roots to (1).
Proof From The Fundamental Theorem of Algebra, we know that there are three roots
to our original cubic equation. Therefore, there must be at least one root from each paren-
thesis which gives the same root to (1). Denote them by z1 and z2 . If they are equal, there
is nothing to prove, so assume that this is not the case. We then have
a1 a1 a 1 z1 − z 2 a1
z1 − = z2 − ⇔ z1 − z2 = − ⇔ z 1 z2 = − . (2)
3z1 3z2 3 z1 z2 3
The other roots in the parentheses are multiples of w. Therefore

a1
wz1 w2 z2 = z1 z2 = − ,
3
so they also give rise to the same root because of (2). That is, both parenthesis give the
same roots. ¤
In view of Theorem (2.1), to find solutions to (1), just choose one of the parenthesis and
solve. Denote one of the third roots by A. Then the solutions to (1) are
a1 c2 a1 c2 a1 c2
x=A− − , x = wA − w 2 − and x = w2 A − w − .
3A 2 3A 2 3A 2
Example 2.2 Solve the third degree equation
x3 + 3x2 − 3x − 11 = 0.
We follow the method described above. Put x = y − 1. We then get the equation
y 3 − 6y − 6 = 0.
Now substitute
2
y=z+ .
z
This leads to
8 (z 3 − 2)(z 3 − 4)
z3 − 6 + = 0 ⇒ = 0.
z3 z3
We choose to solve z 3 − 2 = 0. The roots to the original equations then are
√ √ √ √ √ √
2 + 4 − 1, w 2 + w2 4 − 1 and w 2 2 + w 4 − 1.
3 3 3 3 3 3
If we had chosen the other parenthesis, we would have found exactly the same roots as
asserted.
We now investigate an arbitrary fourth degree equation:
x4 + c3 x3 + c2 x2 + c1 x + c0 = 0, ci ∈ C. (3)
We begin by making the substitution

c3
x=y− ,
4
and obtain
y 4 + a2 y 2 + a1 y + a0 = 0.
Our goal is to factorize this equation and get two second order equations, which are easy
to solve. Write
(y 2 + 2qy + p)(y 2 − 2qy + r) = 0 ⇔ y 4 + (r + p − 4q 2 )y 2 + 2q(r − p)y + pr = 0
and collect terms. This gives
pr = a0 ,
2q(r − p) = a1 ,
r + p − 4q 2 = a2 .
If a1 = 0, we make the substitution t = y 2 , and obtain a quadratic equation in t. Otherwise,

with q 6= 0, we have
a1
2p = a2 + 4q 2 − ,
2q
a1
2r = a2 + 4q 2 + .
2q
Because 2p2r = 4a0 , we get a sixth degree equation in q:
64q 6 + 32a2 q 4 + 4(a22 − 4a0 )q 2 − a21 = 0.

2.3 Tschirnhaus transformations 9
If we substitute t = q 2 , then the above equation becomes a third degree equation in t, which
can be solved by our third degree formula. We take one of the roots qi , i = 1, 2, . . . , 6, and
use it to make the factorization. Then we solve both second order equations in y, reverse
the transformations, and we find the roots of (3).
Example 2.3 Solve the equation
x4 − 4x3 − 16x + 35 = 0. (4)
By letting x = y + 1, this equation is transformed into
y 4 − 6y 2 − 24y + 16 = 0.
We try to factorize this as above, and get
64q 6 − 192q 4 − 112q 2 − 576 = 16(q 2 − 4)(4q 4 + 4q 2 + q) = 0.

We then have q = 2, p = 8 and r = 2, so the factorization is
(2 + 4y + y 2 )(2 − 4y + y 2 ) = 0.
The roots of (4) will therefore be

√
x = −1 ± 2i and x=3± 2.
2.3 Tschirnhaus transformations

Tschirnhaus transformations were invented by the German mathematician Ehrenfried von
Tschirnhaus (1651–1708). The Swedish algebraist Erland Bring (1736–1798) showed by a
Tschirnhaus transformation that the general quintic equation can be transformed to the
form
x5 + c1 x + c0 = 0.
The English mathematician George Jerrard (1804–1863) generalized this result. He showed
that one can always transform a general nth degree equation to a form where the terms
xn−1 , xn−2 , and xn−3 are absent.
Consider the general nth degree equation:
xn + cn−1 xn−1 + . . . + c1 x + c0 = 0. (5)
If we make a substitution where we involve the roots of (5), then, if we are clever,
coefficients can disappear. For example, if we succeed to obtain
xnk + cn−1 xn−1

k + . . . + c 1 xk + c 0 ,
where xk is a root of (5) as coefficient of y n−1 , then the coefficient for this term in our new
polynomial will disappear. Therefore, Tschirnhaus transformations will have the general
form
yk = an−1 xn−1
k + an−2 xn−2 + . . . + a1 xk + a0 , k = 1, 2, . . . , n,
where xk is a root of (5).
In order to make clever substitutions, we need to understand some more theory.
Definition 2.4 The polynomials
Pk (x1 , . . . , xn ) = xk1 + xk2 + . . . + xkn , k = 0, 1, 2, . . . ,
are denoted the kth power polynomials.

Assume that we have a general nth degree polynomial as in (5). Then the following
theorem holds.
Theorem 2.5 (Newton’s formula for power sums)
Let Pk (x1 , . . . , xn ) = xk1 + xk2 + . . . + xkn , where x1 , . . . , xn are roots of
f (x) = xn + cn−1 xn + . . . + c1 x + c0 = 0.
Then
P1 + cn−1 = 0,
P2 + cn−1 P1 + 2cn−2 = 0,
P3 + cn−1 P2 + cn−2 P1 + 3cn−3 = 0,
..
.
Pn−1 + . . . + c4 P3 + c3 P2 + c2 P1 + (n − 1)c1 = 0,
and, for k ≥ n,
Pk + . . . + c3 Pk−n+3 + c2 Pk−n+2 + c1 Pk−n+1 + c0 Pk−n = 0.
Proof We can write f as
f (x) = (x − x1 )(x − x2 ) . . . (x − xn ).
Now differentiate this equality with the help of logarithmic differentiation, to obtain
f (x) f (x) f (x)
f 0 (x) = + + ... + ,
x − x1 x − x2 x − xn
where
f (x)
= xn−1 + an−2 xn−2 + . . . + a1 x + a0 .
x − xi
By comparing coefficients, we get
an−2 = cn−1 + xi ,
an−3 = cn−2 + an−2 xi ,
..
.
a0 = c 1 + a 1 xi .
Substituting the expression for an−k in the expression for an−k−1 , we have
an−2 = cn−1 + xi ,
an−3 = x2i + cn−1 xi + cn−2 ,
..
.
an−k = xik−1 + cn−1 xik−2 + . . . + cn−k+1 .
2.3 Tschirnhaus transformations 11
It follows that
f 0 (x) = nxn−1 + (P1 + ncn−1 )xn−2 + . . . + (Pn−1 + cn−1 Pn−2 + . . . + c2 P1 + nc1 ).
Differentiating the polynomial in the ordinary way gives
f 0 (x) = nxn−1 + (n − 1)cn−1 xn−2 + . . . + 2c2 x + c1 .
By comparing coefficients of these two expressions one obtains the first part of the theorem.
The last part follows from summing the following identity over i = 1, 2, . . . , n:
xn+k
i + cn−1 xn+k−1
i + . . . + c1 xk+1
i + c0 xk = 0.
We have thus proved the theorem. ¤

We use this in Tschirnhaus transformations in the following way:
• Carry out the substitution with the roots as we just described above.
• Calculate Pk (y1 , . . . , yn ) and express it in xk . Because xk is a root of an nth degree

polynomial, we can express every ykj in a polynomial of degree n − 1 .
• Decide which coefficients to eliminate in the new polynomial.
• Look at the Newton identities for both polynomials, then substitute these expressions,
and solve for the coefficients.
Example 2.6 Take the equation
xn + cn−1 xn−1 + . . . + c1 x + c0 = 0.
We want to eliminate the xn−1 −term. Substitute
yk = x k + a 0 , k = 1, 2, . . . , n,
where a0 is an arbitrary constant. We will then get an equation in y of the form
y n + bn−1 y n−1 + . . . + b1 y + b0 = 0.
We calculate P1 (y1 , . . . , yn ) and express in xk . Summation over k in the relation
yk = x k + a 0 ,
gives
P1 (y1 , . . . , yn ) = P1 (x1 , . . . , xn ) + na0 .
But by Newton’s formula, we have
P1 (y1 , . . . , yn ) + bn−1 = 0 and P1 (x1 , . . . , xn ) + cn−1 = 0.
Let bn−1 = 0. Then

cn−1
−cn−1 + na0 = 0 ⇒ a0 = .
n
To get rid of the xn−1 -term we shall thus make the substitution
cn−1
yk = x k + .
n
If one has a second order equation and makes the substitution
c1
yk = x k + ,
2
then the equation in y is
³ c1 ´ 2 ³ c1 ´ c21
y− + c1 y − + c0 = 0 ⇒ y2 − + c0 = 0.
2 2 4
The roots to this equation are
r r
c21 c21
y1 = + c0 and y2 = − + c0 .
4 4
The roots of the equation in x will therefore be
r r
c1 c21 c1 c21
x1 = − + + c0 and x2 = − − + c0 .
2 4 2 4
Thus we have obtained the well-known formula for solving quadratics with the help of
a Tschirnhaus transformation.
To find a Tschirnhaus transformation where xn−1 , xn−2 and xn−3 vanish is quite messy;
see King [11].
If we have transformed a fifth degree equation to the Bring-Jerrard form, that is to the
form
x5 + c1 x + c0 = 0, c1 , c2 6= 0, (6)
then the transformation
c0
yk = xk ,
c1
transforms this equation to the form
y 5 + ax + a = 0,
where a = c51 /c40 .

In Chapter 3 we show that it is impossible to solve equations of degree ≥ 5. Therefore,
we cannot find a Tschirnhaus transformation that transforms a general quintic to the form
x5 + c0 = 0 for example. Still, the technique with Tschirnhaus transformations is a powerful
tool when we are trying to solve equations.
13
3 Solvability of algebraic equations

In this chapter, we present the history of the quintic equation. We also present the necessary
Galois theory, and give a criterion for when an equation is solvable by radicals.
3.1 History of the quintic

After the Italians had solved the cubic and quartic, several mathematicians tried to solve
the quintic; of course, no one succeeded in finding a formula involving only radicals. Joseph
Louis Lagrange (1736–1814) wrote a book called Réflexions sur la résolution algèbrique
des équations (1770–71); see Stillwell [24]. In this book, Lagrange examined all previous
attempts to solve the quintic. He observed that using a special technique called Lagrange
resolvents, that worked for the cubic and quartic, one gets higher order equations when
applied to an equation of degree ≥ 5. For an nth degree equation, we define the Lagrange
resolvent as
r(w) = x1 + x2 w + . . . + xn wn−1 , (7)
where xi , i = 1, . . . , n, are the roots of the equation and w is an nth root of unity. To be
able to express the roots of the equation in terms of this resolvent, consider the sum
s = wk + w2k + . . . + w(n−1)k ,
where k is an integer. We have
(1 − wk )(wk + w2k + . . . + w(n−1)k ) = 1 − w nk = 0.
Therefore, if k 6= 0 modulo n, the sum equals 0, otherwise it equals n. We then get the
roots to the equation as
n−1
X
nxk = w−k+1 r(wj ), k = 1, 2 . . . , n. (8)
j=1
There exists different ways of finding the Lagrange resolvent for an equation.
Example 3.1 For a third degree equation, the method of Lagrange resolvents means by
(7) that we put
z = x1 + wx2 + w2 x3 ,
where the xi are solutions to a third degree equation and w is a cube root of unity. We can
permute these roots into each other which gives six different z values z1 , . . . , z6 . Then we
form an equation
(x − z1 )(x − z2 ) . . . (x − z6 ) = 0,
where zi are the six permutations of z. This equation will be quadratic in x3 , so it is
solvable. We now show that the equation above is a quadratic in x3 . We list the six
different permutations:
• z1 = x1 + wx2 + w2 x3
• z2 = x3 + wx1 + w2 x2 = wz1
• z3 = w 2 z1
14 3 SOLVABILITY OF ALGEBRAIC EQUATIONS
• z4 = x1 + wx3 + w2 x2
• z5 = wz4
• z6 = w 2 z4
Therefore we have
(x − z1 )(x − z2 )(x − z3 ) = x3 − z13 and (x − z4 )(x − z5 )(x − z6 ) = x3 − z43 .
From this we get
(x − z1 )(x − z2 ) . . . (x − z6 ) = (x3 − z13 )(x3 − z43 ) = x6 − (z13 + z43 )x3 + z13 z43 .
We see that it is a quadratic equation in x3 as asserted.

One was led to study the resolvents because one had found the following formula for
one of the roots to the cubic:
1 p p
x1 = (x1 + x2 + x3 + 3 (x1 + wx2 + w2 x3 )3 + 3 (x1 + wx3 + w2 x2 )3 ).
3
Observe the quantities z13 z43 and z13 +z43 , where z1 = x1 +wx2 +w2 x3 and z4 = x1 +wx3 +w2 x2 ,
are symmetric in the roots. But the coefficients in a polynomial are symmetric polynomials
of its roots. Hence z13 z43 and z13 + z43 are known quantities. The problem is to find the
correct permutation that correspond to the solution formula for x 1 above. The method of
Lagrange resolvents is a simplification of this search for the right combinations.
If we make similar constructions for the quartic, we get an equation of degree 24, which
is still also possible to solve. But when we do the same for the quintic, we get an equation
of degree 120. Observe that the degree of the resolvents equals the order of S 4 and S5 ,
respectively. We see that the degree grows rapidly and the resolvents get more and more
complex. This observation convinced Lagrange that quintic and higher order equations were
not solvable by radicals.
In 1799, the Italian mathematician Paolo Ruffini (1765–1822) published a proof that
equations of degree five or higher are not solvable by radicals. The proof was not complete,
and Ruffini tried during the rest of his life to improve the proof.
The Norwegian mathematician Niels Henrik Abel (1802–1829) presented a proof around
1825. There was an error in the proof which Abel corrected in 1826. He presented his proof
in the mathematical journal Crelle’s Journal and other mathematician subsequently began
studying the proof. Abel’s proof showed that it was impossible to solve the general equation
of degree ≥ 5.
Ruffini and Abel looked at Sn . The concepts were not at all clear, but they observed
that certain things that worked with S3 and S4 did not work for S5 . From this observation,
they concluded that the quintic and higher equations are not solvable by radicals.
Abel’s and Ruffini’s proofs did not answer the question as to which equations actually
can be solved by radicals. Neither did they present an equation not solvable by radicals.
The answer to these questions were unknown until Evariste Galois (1811–1832) answered
them. Galois did not know Ruffini’s work, but he knew Abel’s.
We shall present parts of Galois work below. In the next section we will use modern
concepts to prove a criterion for deciding when an equation is solvable by radicals. It may
3.1 History of the quintic 15
be a good idea to first look a little informally at Galois’ thoughts to understand better the
rather abstract concepts of Galois theory.
The concepts of ‘group’ and ‘ring theory’ were not invented at the time of Galois. In
fact, it was Galois who invented them, and understood their full power. Galois also invented
the term ‘field’. As mentioned, Galois made a lot of contributions to this area; for example,
he defined subgroups, normal groups, cosets, and permutation groups.
y
6
· T
· T
· T
· T
· T -x
T ·
T ·
T ·
T ·
T ·
Figure 1
If one is given a figure with nodes in the plane, as in Figure 1, one can permute the
nodes so the distance to the origin is preserved. These permutation are called distance
preserving. If one has two such permutations σ1 and σ2 , then obviously the permutation
σ1 σ2 is distance preserving. Also, to each element σ1 , there must be an element that reverses
the permutation. We call it the inverse and denote it by σ1−1 . Compositions of permutations
are also associative. All these properties mean that the set of permutations form a group.
The roots to the equation
x5 = 1,
lie symmetrically on a circle. There are other polynomials where the zeros exhibit a much
more antisymmetric appearance when plotted in the complex plane. It is tempting to
permute the roots onto each other and investigate the symmetry. That is what Galois did.
Galois considered a field F that contained the coefficients of a polynomial. One express
the coefficients in terms of the symmetric polynomials (see Section 3.2). Hence, permuting
the roots into each other will not affect the original field. Galois also constructed the Galois
Resolvent. If we have a polynomial with coefficients in F , then the resolvent
v = a 1 x1 + a 2 x1 + . . . + a n xn , a1 , . . . , an ∈ R,
is denoted a Galois resolvent if one gets n! different functions v when permuting the roots
onto each other. Then we form the equation
P (v) = (v − v1 )(v − v2 ) . . . (v − vn ) = 0,
where each vi is a certain symmetric function of the roots of the polynomial. But the
coefficients can be represented symmetrically in terms of the roots. Hence P is a polynomial
with coefficients in F .
Galois also investigated when an arbitrary function of the roots can be expressed ratio-
nally by the resolvent v. Such functions include, for example, the roots of the polynomial.
In this case, Galois observed that one gets a permutation group that one can reduce to a
single element. More clearly we can put it this way. Assume that we have a polynomial
with coefficients in a field F , for example Q. We must adjoin certain nth roots to get a field
that contain the roots x1 , . . . , xn . The coefficients of the polynomial can be expressed by
the symmetric polynomials, so we can look at extensions of the field
Q(x1 , x2 , . . . , xn ),
(for the notation, see Section 3.2 and the Appendix). When we adjoin an nth root to this
field, then we destroy symmetry. But by adjoining nth roots in all the other variables
we regain symmetry. If we permute the roots onto each other, the original field will be
unaffected. These permutations form a group called the Galois group. When we adjoined
the roots, we got a chain of extensions
F ⊆ F (a) ⊆ . . . ⊆ E.
If F ⊆ L, then Gal(E/F ) ⊇ Gal(E/L). Therefore we must have a corresponding chain
Gal(E/F ) = G1 ⊇ G2 ⊇ . . . ⊇ Gk = Gal(F/F ) = {e}.
This is a key observation, because if it is impossible to have such a chain of groups for the
permutation group of index ≥ 5, then it is also impossible to solve equations of degree ≥ 5.
Galois succeeded in proving this. With the help of his theory he was also able to give a
criterion for when equations are solvable. Galois also produced an equation that was not
solvable by radicals. That is, Galois settled all the remaining question that Ruffini and
Abel had left unanswered.
We see that Galois’ theory is not very different from Lagrange’s theory. But because
Galois invented the group and field theory, he was able to prove much more than Lagrange.
Because of Galois short life (his life ended in a duel), he did not write down all his
thoughts in a strict and concise way. Galois’ brother Alfred and his friend August Chevalier
sent his posthumous work to several mathematician, but they did not get any response.
Joseph Liouville was the first mathematician to study Galois’ results conscientiously. Liou-
ville understood their importance and presented them in 1846.
3.2 Galois theory

The aim of this section, and the remaining sections of this chapter, is to produce a criterion
for when an algebraic equation is solvable by radicals.
Suppose that F is a field. If F is a subfield of a field E, then E is called an extension
field . We denote the extension as E/F . We begin by giving two definitions.
Definition 3.2 An element u ∈ E is algebraic if there exists a nonzero polynomial

f (x) ∈ F [x] such that f (u) = 0; otherwise u is called transcendental .
Definition 3.3 Let u ∈ E. A polynomial m(x) ∈ F [x] that has minimal degree, which is
monic, and satisfies m(u) = 0 is called a minimal polynomial of u and is denoted min(F, u).
3.2 Galois theory 17
An extension is called algebraic if every element of E is algebraic over F . We will only

deal with algebraic extensions.
We are interested in finding the smallest field that contains an element u ∈ E and F .
We denote this field by F (u), and call this a simple extension. We can use the minimal
polynomial to find out things about F (u). It is clear that min(F, u) must be irreducible
over F [x], and if there is another polynomial f (x) ∈ F [x] with f (u) = 0, then min(F, u)
divides f (x). If we define
θ : F [x] → E by θ(f (x)) = f (u),

(we take a polynomial from F [x] and evaluate it at u), θ will be a homomorphism. The
kernel of the homomorphism, ker(θ), is the ideal generated by min(F, u), which we denote
hmin(F, u)i. The factor ring F [x]/hmin(F, u)i is a field and is isomorphic to F (u). We can
identify F (u) with the vector space of all elements
c0 + c1 u + . . . + cn−1 un−1 ,
where ci ∈ F and n is the degree of min F (u). The degree of the extension is denoted [E : F ]
and equals the degree of the minimal polynomial.
We are also interested in finding the smallest field that contains F and some elements
u1 , . . . , un ∈ E. We can build such an extension by simple ones, and then get a field which
we denote by F (u1 , . . . , un ). The extension F (u1 , u2 ) equals F (u1 )(u2 ), see Nicholson [18].
So we can always build extensions as simple ones.
Definition 3.4 If a polynomial f ∈ F [x] splits in an extension field E, i.e.,
f (x) = c(x − x1 ) . . . (x − xn ),
where x1 , . . . , xn ∈ E, then E is called a splitting field for f .
Assume that we have a polynomial
f (x) = c0 + c1 x + . . . + xn ∈ F [x].
If the zeros of f (x) are x1 , . . . , xn ∈ E, then the coefficients can be expressed by the
elementary symmetric polynomials. More precisely, if we define
X
σk = xi1 xi2 . . . xik , k = 1, 2, . . . , n,
i1 <i2 <...<ik
then
ck = (−1)n−k σn−k , k = 0, 1, 2, . . . , n − 1.
If we consider the automorphisms θ : E → E on E = F (u1 , . . . , un ), u1 , . . . , un ∈ E, for
which θ(F ) = F , we will have some control over the zeros of f . These automorphisms form
a group, so we can also make use of all the theory developed for groups. This motivates the
following definition.
Definition 3.5 Let E be a field extension of F . The Galois group Gal(E/F ) is the set of
automorphism θ : E → E that leaves F fixed.
We will now prove a theorem about Gal(E/F ).

Theorem 3.6 Assume that we have a field extension E = F (u1 , . . . , un ). The automor-
phisms θ : E → E that leaves F fixed only depend on how they permute the set {u1 , . . . , un }.
Proof We will use the fact that we can build extensions as simple ones. Put F (u1 ) = F1 .
The extension F1 (u2 ) = F (u1 , u2 ) consists of all elements
c0 + c1 u2 + . . . + cn−1 un2 1 −1 , ci ∈ F 1 , (9)
where n1 is the degree of the extension. But F1 can also be identified with the vector space
of sums
c00 + c01 u1 + . . . + c0n0 −1 un1 2 −1 , c0i ∈ F,
where n2 is the degree of the extension. If we substitute this expression for ci in (9), we see
that we get a binomial in u1 and u2 with coefficients c0i ∈ F . The automorphisms θ : E → E
that leaves F fixed, will not affect the c0i . Because of this fact we only have to know what
the automorphisms do with the u1 and u2 . Similarly for extensions with more than two
elements, but we will get a multinomial in u1 , . . . , un with coefficients c0i ∈ F . ¤
Corollary 3.7 If [E : F ] is finite, then Gal(E/F ) is also finite.
Proof We can write E = F (u1 , . . . , un ) because of the definition of [E : F ]. By the

above theorem, there are only finitely many possibilities for each ui , which means that
Gal(E/F ) is finite. ¤
The idea behind the Galois group is to go back and forth between E and the Galois
group as a pair, and just like a function and its derivative in analysis, we can get a lot of
information by doing this.
If we have F ⊆ L ⊆ E, then Gal(E/L) is a subgroup of Gal(E/F ), and we call L an
intermediate field of the extension E/F . Conversely, if we have a subgroup S of the group
of all automorphism of E, then the set
F(S) = {a ∈ E : σ(a) = a for all σ ∈ S},
is called the fixed field of S and is a subfield of E. What we really have is a one-to-one
inclusion reversing bijection between the set of intermediate fields L and the set of subgroups
H of Gal(E/F ).
Theorem 3.8
1. If L = F(S) for some subgroup S ⊆ aut(E), then L = F(Gal(E/L)).
2. If H = Gal(E/L) for some subfield L of E, then H = Gal(E/F(H)).
Proof Suppose that L = F(S). Then S ⊆ Gal(E/L) and this fact implies that
F(Gal(E/L)) ⊆ F(S) = L. But L ⊆ F(Gal(E/L)), and it follows that L = F(Gal(E/L)).
If H = Gal(E/L) for some subfield L of E, then L ⊆ F(Gal(E/L)) and
Gal(E/F(Gal(E/L)) ⊆ Gal(E/L) = H. But H ⊆ Gal(E/F(H)), so it follows that
H = Gal(E/F(H)). ¤
3.2 Galois theory 19
Definition 3.9 If F ⊆ E, G = Gal(E/F ), and F(G) = F , then the extension is called

Galois.
We are interested in when an extension is Galois. Assume that L is a fixed field of a
group G of automorphisms of an extension E/F . One can show that then [E : L] = |G|;
see Nicholson [18]. We call a polynomial separable if it has distinct roots in every splitting
field. If an element u ∈ E has a minimal polynomial m which is separable, then we have
| Gal(E/F )| = [E : F ]. This is easy to see, because if the degree of m is n, then m has
n distinct roots in E. But by Theorem 3.6, the automorphisms σ of E only depend on
what they do with u, so σ(u) must be a root of m. Consequently, there are n possibilities
and therefore | Gal(E/F )| = [E : F ]. From this we see that if E is a splitting field of
some separable polynomial, then Gal(E/F ) is Galois. Indeed, let L be the fixed field of
Gal(E/F ). Then [E : F ] = | Gal(E/F )| = [E : L], and from the inclusions F ⊆ L ⊆ E, it
follows that F = L, so we have almost proved the following theorem
Theorem 3.10 If E is a splitting field of some separable polynomial in F [x], then Gal(E/F )
is Galois.
We shall now state and prove part of what is often called the main theorem in Galois
theory.
Theorem 3.11 If L is an intermediate field and H is a subgroup of G = Gal(E/F ) such
that L = F(H), then H is normal in G if and only if L is Galois over F , and if this is the
case, Gal(L/F ) ∼
= G/H.
Proof Suppose that H is normal in G. Let b ∈ E be any zero of a minimal polynomial
m(F, a) over L, where a ∈ L. Let σ ∈ G such that σ(a) = b. Such a σ exists because G
consists of the automorphisms of E. Take τ ∈ H. Then τ (b) = τ (σ(a)) = σσ −1 τ (σ(a)).
Because H / G, σ −1 τ σ ∈ H, by the definition of a normal group. The field L is fixed by the
automorphisms in H. This implies that σ −1 τ σ = a, and hence τ (σ(a)) = σ(a) = b. Thus
b ∈ F(H) = L. This means that min(F, a) splits over L and is separable. This shows that
the extension is Galois.
Suppose that L/F is Galois and let θ : G → Gal(L/F ) be given by θ(σ) = σ|L . It is a
homomorphism and the kernel is Gal(L/F ) = H. Hence H is normal. The isomorphism
theorem now shows that Gal(L/F ) ∼ = G/H. ¤
p √
Example 3.12 Consider the equation, x4 − 6x2 + 7 = 0. Its roots are ± 3 ± 2. If we
make the extension
√ √ √ √ √ √
q q q
Q ⊆ Q( 2) ⊆ Q( 2)( 3 + 2) ⊆ Q( 2, 3 + 2)( 3 − 2) = E,
all the roots will lie in the extension field E. We adjoined a root of an element in each
extension to get the field E. It is clear that if we can solve the equation by radicals, then
we can make an extension E like the one above.
Definition 3.13 We call a field extension F (u1 , . . . , ur ) radical if there exist integers
n1 , . . . , nr such that un1 1 ∈ F and uni i ∈ F (u1 , . . . , ui−1 ), i = 2, 3, . . . , r.
Equations like xn − 1 = 0 will be of interest in Section 3.4. An element that satisfies
such an equation is called an nth root of unity. If charF does not divide n, an nth-root will
exist; see Morandi [16].
Theorem 3.14 If F is a field that contains an nth root of unity w, then the extension
F (u)/F , where u is in some field E, is Galois and Gal(F (u)/F ) is abelian.
Proof Assume that un = a. Then xn − a = 0 has roots u, uw, . . . , uw n−1 . The poly-
nomial xn − a is separable over F (u). Hence F (u) is Galois by Theorem 3.10. This means
that if σ and τ ∈ Gal(F (u)/F ), then σ(u) and τ (u) are zeros of xn − a. So assume that
σ(u) = uw i and τ (u) = uw j . We then have
σ(τ (u)) = uw j+i = τ (σ(u)),
where i and j are integers. Thus Gal(F (u)/F ) is abelian. ¤

We end this section with an example.
Example 3.15 Consider the equation
x4 − 7x2 + 10 = 0.
√ √
We can factorize the left hand side as√(x2 − 2)(x 2 − 5), so the zeros are ± 2 and ± 5.
√ √
We make the extensions F = Q ⊆ Q( 2) ⊆ Q( 2, 5) = E which are radical. What is
Gal(E/F )? Because√an irreducible
√ polynomial
√ √splits in E, we know that the extension is
Galois. This gives ± 2 → ± 2 and ± 5 → ± 5, because if u is a root of a minimal poly-
nomial, then σ(u), where σ ∈ Gal(E/F ), should
√ also be a root of this minimal polynomial.
The field Q should be fixed so for example 2 → 1 is impossible. So we have |G| = 4, as
predicted. The elements of the Galois group are
µ√ √ √ √ ¶
ε = √2 −√2 √5 −√5 ,
2− 2 5− 5
µ √ √ √ √ ¶
√2 − 2
√ √ 5 − √5 ,
σ1 =
− 2 2 5− 5
µ√ √ √ √ ¶
√ 2 −√2 √5 −√5
σ2 = ,
2− 2− 5 5
µ √ √ √ √ ¶
√2 −√2 √5 −√5
σ3 = .
− 2 2− 5 5
It is easy to verify that this is a group which is isomorphic to a subgroup of S 4 .
3.3 Solvable groups

We begin with a definition.
Definition 3.16 A group G is solvable if there is a chain of subgroups
{e} = H0 ⊆ H1 ⊆ . . . ⊆ Hn = G,
where each Hi is a subgroup of G, Hi / Hi+1 , and Hi+1 /Hi is abelian.

3.3 Solvable groups 21
An abelian group is always solvable because {e} = H0 ⊆ G satisfies the conditions in

the definition above.
We are interested in when a factor group G/K is abelian. Take two cosets Ka and Kb.
Suppose that KaKb = KbKa, i.e., Kab = Kba. Then k1 ab = k2 ba for every k1 , k2 ∈ K,
which implies that bab−1 a−1 = k2−1 k1 ∈ K.
We need another definition.
Definition 3.17 If G is a group and x, y ∈ G, then xyx−1 y −1 is called the commutator of

x and y and is denoted [x, y]. The subgroup G0 , generated by all products of commutators,
is the commutator subgroup (or the derived group) of G.
Lemma 3.18 The inverse of a commutator is a commutator.
Proof If z = [x, y] = xyx−1 y −1 , then z −1 = yxy −1 x−1 = [y, x]. ¤
It is clear that G0 is closed under the operation in G, and because of the lemma above,
we see that G0 really is a subgroup of G. But even more can be said.
Theorem 3.19 The group G0 is a normal subgroup of G.
Proof We have to show that ghg −1 ∈ G0 for every g ∈ G and every g ∈ G0 . The trick
is to insert g −1 g because we have
g[x, y]g −1 = gxg −1 gyg −1 gx−1 g −1 gyg −1 = [gxg −1 , gyg −1 ].
Any element h of G0 is a product c1 . . . cn of commutators, and this gives
ghg −1 = g(c1 . . . cn )g −1 = gc1 g −1 gc2 g −1 . . . gcn g −1 = d1 . . . dk ,
where di = gci g −1 . But di is a commutator, hence ghg −1 ∈ G0 . ¤
It follows from the theorem that G/G0 is abelian. We also see from the definition
preceeding Definition 3.17 that a normal subgroup H of G contains every commutator
(G0 ⊆ H) if and only if G/H is abelian. Conversely, if G0 ⊆ H, where H is a subgroup of
G, g ∈ G, and h ∈ H, then
ghg −1 = (ghg −1 h−1 )h = [g, h]h ∈ G0 h ⊆ Hh = H,
thus H / G and G/H is abelian. Consequently, G0 is the smallest normal subgroup of G

whose factor group is abelian.
We now look at the following chain:
G ⊇ G1 ⊇ G2 ⊇ . . . ⊇ G n ⊇ . . . ,
where G1 = G0 and Gi+1 = (Gi )0 . In this chain Gi+1 / Gi and Gi /Gi+1 is abelian. This is
connected to solvable groups by the following theorem.
Theorem 3.20 G is solvable if and only if Gn = {e} for some n.

Proof If Gn = {e}, then G is solvable because of the definition of solvability.

Conversely, assume that G is solvable. Then there is a chain
{e} = H0 ⊆ H1 ⊆ . . . ⊆ Hn = G,
where Hi is a subgroup of G such that Hi / Hi+1 and Hi+1 /Hi is abelian.

The group G/Hn−1 is abelian, so G1 = G0 ⊆ Hn−1 because G0 is the smallest normal
subgroup of G whose factor group is abelian . Similarly, since the factor group H n−1 /Hn−2
0
is abelian, Hn−1 ⊆ Hn−2 , and thus G2 = (G1 )0 ⊆ Hn−10 ⊆ Hn−2 . Continuing this way, it
follows that
Gn ⊆ H0 = {e}. ¤
Corollary 3.21 If G is a solvable group, then every subgroup of G is solvable.
Proof Let H be a subgroup of G, then H = H 0 ⊆ G0 = G. Assume that H k ⊆ Gk for

some k ∈ Z+ . Then
H k+1 = (H k )0 ⊆ (Gk )0 = Gk+1 .
After n steps we get H n ⊆ Gn ⊆ {e}, so H is solvable. ¤
We have now developed all the theory necessary to give a criterion for when an equation
is solvable by radicals. This will be the subject of the next section.
3.4 Solvability by radicals

We have defined radical extensions and we have examined solvability. The following theorem
by Galois connects these two concepts.
Theorem 3.22 Suppose that char(F ) = 0. Let f (x) ∈ F [x] and let E be a splitting field
over F . Then the equation f (x) = 0 is solvable by radicals if and only if Gal(E/F ) is a
solvable group.
Proof If f (x) = 0 is solvable by radicals, there exists a sequence of fields
F = F0 ⊆ F1 = F (w1 ) ⊆ . . . ⊆ Fk = Fk−1 (wk ),
where wini ∈ Fi−1 for i = 1, . . . , k. We may assume that F contains all nth roots of unity
(otherwise adjoin them), so every extension will be Galois by Theorem 3.14. By Theorem
3.11 this implies that Gal(Fk /Fi ) / Gal(Fk /Fi−1 ). Consider the chain
Gal(Fk /F ) ⊇ Gal(Fk /F1 ) ⊇ . . . ⊇ Gal(Fk /Fk ) = {e}.
Every subgroup is normal in the one preceding it. The field Fi is a Galois extension of
Fi−1 , hence Gal(Fi /Fi−1 ) is isomorphic to Gal(Fk /Fi−1 )/ Gal(Fk /Fi ) by Theorem 3.11. But
Gal(Fi /Fi−1 ) is abelian and so is each quotient group in the chain above. This means that
Gal(Fk /F ) is solvable. Since E ⊆ Fk and the extension is Galois, Gal(Fk /E) / Gal(Fk /F )
and Gal(Fk /E) ∼ = Gal(Fk /F )/ Gal(Fk /E), by Theorem 3.11. Thus Gal(Fk /E) is a homo-
morphic image of Gal(Fk /F ) which is a solvable group, i.e., Gal(Fk /E) is solvable.
For the converse, suppose that Gal(E/F ) is a solvable group. We then have a chain
{e} = H0 ⊆ H1 ⊆ . . . ⊆ Hr = Gal(E/F ),
3.4 Solvability by radicals 23
such that Hi+1 / Hi and Hi /Hi+1 is abelian. Let Ki = F(Hi ). Then Ki+1 will be Galois
over Li by Theorem 3.11 and Gal(Ki+1 /Ki ) ∼ = Hi /Hi+1 . Let w be an nth root of unity,
where n is the least common multiple of the orders of the elements in G. Set Li = Ki (w).
Then we have a chain of fields
F ⊆ L0 ⊆ . . . ⊆ Lr .
One can show that this is a radical extension; see Morandi [16] for the details. ¤
Lemma 3.23 If n ≥ 5, then Sn is not a solvable group.
Proof The group An is simple and non-abelian for n ≥ 5, so the derived group of An
equals An i.e. A0n = An . This means that Gn 6= {e} in Theorem 3.20, because, by Theorem
3.19, the only simple groups that are solvable are abelian. Thus An is not solvable. The al-
ternating group An is a subgroup of Sn , so Sn is not solvable for n ≥ 5 by Corollary 3.21. ¤
Example 3.24 If f (x) = x5 − 6x + 2 ∈ Q, then it follows from Eisenstein’s criterion that

this polynomial is irreducible over Q. It has three real roots and two complex conjugate
roots. Because | Gal(E/Q)| = [E : Q] and [Q(u) : Q] = 5, where u is any root to a
minimal polynomial of f over E, its Galois group must contain an element of order 5. Then
Gal(E/Q) contain a 5-cycle and a 2-cycle which generate S5 ; see Nicholson [18]. Therefore
Gal(E/Q) ∼ = S5 . But S5 is not solvable by radicals by the above lemma, hence the equation
f (x) = 0 is not solvable by radicals.
With this theory one can show that the general polynomial of degree n ≥ 5 is not solvable
by radicals. However, for example, xn = 1 is solvable, because it has a well-behaved Galois
group.
25
4 Elliptic functions
We have seen in the previous chapter that, in general, it is impossible to solve a polynomial
equation by radicals if the degree is greater than four. However, there are other ways one
can solve such equations. In this chapter we shall describe one possible method.
4.1 General theory

Let us first try to motivate why elliptic functions appear in the theory of algebraic equations.
√
The equation xn = a has the solution x = n a , which we can write as x = eln a/n . In
analysis, the function ln x is defined by a transcendental integral:
Z x
dt
ln x = √ .
1 t2
Similarly,
x
dt
Z
arcsin x = √ ,
0 1 − t2
and sin x is the inverse of this integral. If we put some other polynomial in the integral, we
might hope to get a function, or the inverse, which solves x5 + ax + a = 0. We can think of
these functions as super-roots. This leads to the elliptic functions, and we shall investigate
their properties below.
Definition 4.1 A function f in C is said to be meromorphic if it is analytic except for
isolated poles.
Definition 4.2 If there exists a complex number ω such that f (z) = f (z +ω), for all z ∈ C,
then ω is called a period of f .
How many periods can a function have? In order to answer this question, we need a
couple of results.
Lemma 4.3 A sequence of periods {ωn }n∈Z+ of a meromorphic function f , which is as-
sumed to be non-constant, cannot have zero as an accumulation point.
Proof Assume on the contrary that zero is an accumulation point. For a regular point
z of f we introduce the function g by
g(w) = f (z) − f (z + w).
Then g is analytic in a neighbourhood of 0. Furthermore, g(ωn ) is zero for every integer

n. By the uniqueness theorem for analytic functions, g is zero in a neighbourhood of 0,
which means that f (z) = f (z + w) in this neighbourhood. Hence f is constant function, a
contradiction. ¤
If there is a convergent sequence {ωn }n∈Z+ of periods of f , then the limit point ω is a
period. In fact, by continuity,
f (z + ω) = lim f (z + ωn ) = f (z),
n→∞
so ω is a period of f . From the lemma we get the next theorem.

26 4 ELLIPTIC FUNCTIONS
Theorem 4.4 A sequence of periods {ωn }n∈Z+ cannot have a finite accumulation point.
Proof If there were a finite accumulation point, then by the Cauchy criterion, ωn − ωm
tend to 0, as m, n → ∞. But ωn − ωm is a period of f . By Lemma 4.3 this is impossible. ¤
From the theorem we see that if we have a period ω, then among all periods with this
direction in the complex plane, there must be a period with least distance to 0. Such a
period is denoted a primitive period. If we have a primitive period ω, then every integer
multiple of ω also is a period, because
f (z + nω) = f (z + (n − 1)ω + ω) = f (z + (n − 1)ω) = . . . = f (z + ω) = f (z).
Could rω be a period even for real numbers r? The answer is no, because if there existed a
non-integer multiple of ω, denoted ω1 , then ω1 /ω = r, where r is a real number. By writing
r = n + t, where n is the integer part and t is the fractional part of r, it would follow that
ω1 − nω = tω. But tω is a period of f which is closer to zero than ω. This is impossible
because of the discussion above. We say that two periods are different if they are not integer
multiples of each other. Obviously two different periods satisfy Im( ωω21 ) 6= 0.
We can now prove the following theorem.
Theorem 4.5 (Jacobi theorem) There does not exist a non-constant meromorphic func-
tion with more than two primitive periods.
Proof In view of Theorem 4.4, we can always create a parallelogram which is spanned
by two different periods, such that there are no periods in it other than the vertices. Assume
that there is a third period ω3 . Then it can be represented as a linear combination of ω1
and ω2 :
ω3 = r 1 ω1 + r 2 ω2 , r1 , r2 ∈ R.
Let ri = ni + ti , were ni is the integer part and ti is the fractional part of ri . Then we have
ω3 − n 1 ω1 − n 2 ω2 = t 1 ω1 + t 2 ω2 .
But ω3 − n1 ω1 − n2 ω2 is a period and it lies inside the parallelogram, a contradiction. ¤
If a function f has two different periods, then the function is called doubly-periodic. The
parallelogram with corners c, c + ω1 , c + ω1 + ω2 , and c + ω2 , where c is an arbitrary point
in the complex plane, is called a period parallelogram and is denoted by Ω. The only node
that is assumed to belong to the parallelogram is c, and the edges in it are the ones between
c and c + ω1 and c and c + ω2 . The complex plane is divided into a lattice induced by the
point c and the two periods. We only have to study a doubly-periodic function inside this
parallelogram.
4.1 General theory 27
»»
»» »»» ¤
»» » ¤
»» ¤ ¤
¤ » ¤
¤ ¤ » » »
:¤»
» ¤
¤ » »» ¤ » ¤º
»
¤ » ¤
¤º Ω ¤
¤ »¤
»
¤ » :
» ¤»» ¤
¤ »¤» »
¤ »»¤ c
» ¤ ¤
¤ ¤ »¤
¤ » »
»¤»
¤
»» ¤ »»
¤»»»
A lattice induced by the point c and two periods
Figure 2
Definition 4.6 A meromorphic, doubly periodic function is called an elliptic function.

Since the singularities of a doubly periodic function are isolated, we can assume that no
pole lies on the boundary of the period-parallelogram. In fact, if there are poles on the
boundary, then just move the parallelogram a little by choosing a new node c.
Theorem 4.7 A non-constant elliptic function f cannot be regular inside a period paral-
lelogram.
Proof If f did not have a singularity inside a period-parallelogram, then it would have a
maximal absolute value M . By periodicity, |f (z)| ≤ M in the whole plane, so by Liouville’s
theorem, it would be a constant, which contradicts what we assumed. ¤
Definition 4.8 The number of poles of a periodic function f in a period-parallelogram,
where a pole of order n is counted n times, is called the order of f .
Theorem 4.9 The sum of the residues of an elliptic function f inside a period-parallelogram
is zero.
Proof Integrating along the boundary ∂Ω of Ω, we have
Z Z c+ω1 Z c+ω1 +ω2 Z c+ω2 Z c
f (z) dz = f (z) dz + f (z) dz + f (z) dz + f (z) dz.
∂Ω c c+ω1 c+ω1 +ω2 c+ω2
Make the substitution w = z + ω2 in the third integral. Then

Z c+ω2 Z c
f (z) dz = f (w + ω2 ) dw.
c+ω1 +ω2 c+ω1
But f (w + ω2 ) = f (w), and thus the first and third integral cancel. Similarly the second
and fourth cancel. Hence Z
f (z) dz = 0.
∂Ω
By the residue theorem,
Z n
X
f (z) dz = 2πi ri ,
∂Ω i=1
where ri are the residues of f , so the sum of residues is zero. ¤
It follows from the above theorem that there cannot be an elliptic function of order one.
Theorem 4.10 The number of zeros a1 , . . . , ap of an elliptic function f , where a zero is

counted according to its multiplicity, is equal to the order N of the function.
Proof We recall from complex analysis that

p q
1 f 0 (z)
Z X X
dz = ord(ai ) − ord(pj ),
2πi ∂Ω f (z)
i=1 j=1
where ord( · ) is the order of a zero ai or of a pole pj of f . The function f 0 /f is elliptic, so

the integral is zero, i.e.,
p
X q
X
ord(ai ) = ord(pj ) = N. ¤
i=1 j=1
The function F (z) = f (z) − C, where C is a constant, is also an elliptic function, having
the same poles as f in a period-parallelogram. We thus have the following corollary.
Corollary 4.11 For every C ∈ C, the number of points z in Ω where f (z) = C, is equal
to the order of f .
Theorem 4.12 Let f be an elliptic function which has p zeros at a1 , . . . , ap and q poles at
p1 , . . . , pq . Then
p
X Xq
ord(ai ) − ord(qj ) = mω1 + nω2
i=1 j=1
for some integers m and n.
Proof We again have from complex analysis that

p q
1 f 0 (z)
X X Z
ord(ai ) − ord(qj ) = z dz.
2πi ∂Ω f (z)
i=1 j=1
If we make the same substitution as in the proof of Theorem 4.9, we get

c+ω1
f 0 (z) f 0 (z) f 0 (z + ω2 )
Z Z
z dz = z − (z + ω2 ) dz
Ω f (z) c f (z) f (z + ω2 )
Z c+ω2 0
f (z) f 0 (z + ω1 )
− z − (z + ω1 ) dz
c f (z) f (z + ω1 )
f (c + ω2 ) f (c + ω1 )
= ω1 log − ω2 log
f (c) f (c)
= ω1 log 1 − ω2 log 1
= ω1 2πin1 − ω2 2πin2 ,
where n1 and n2 are integers. ¤

4.2 The Weierstrass ℘ function 29
4.2 The Weierstrass ℘ function

Let f be an elliptic function with periods ω1 and ω2 . We may assume that
ω1
Im( ) > 0,
ω2
otherwise, replace ω1 by ω2 and ω2 by ω1 . Define a lattice Λ by
Λ = {kω1 + lω2 ; k, l ∈ Z},
and let
Λ0 = Λ − {0}.
Theorem 4.13 The sum

X 1
|ω|p
ω∈Λ0
converges for p > 2.
Proof For k = 1, 2, . . . we define Pk to be the parallelogram with corners ±kω1 and

±kω2 , where k is an integer. Such a parallelogram has 8k ω-points on its boundary. Let δ
be the shortest distance from the center of P1 to the boundary. We then have
∞ ∞
X 1 X 8k 8 X 1
< = .
|ω|p (kδ)p δp k p−1
ω∈Λ0 k=1 k=1
The series on the right hand side converges for p > 2. Hence we have proved the theorem. ¤
In view of Theorem 4.13, the function
X 1
G(z) = −2 ,
(z − ω)3
ω∈Λ0
converges absolutely and uniformly in each bounded region of the z-plane that does not
intersect Λ0 . Hence the sum defines a meromorphic function.
We have
X 1 X 1
G(z + ω1 ) = −2 = −2 = G(z),
(z + ω1 − ω)3 (z − ω)3
ω∈Λ0 0 ω∈Λ
because of the infinite summation range, and similarly G(z + ω2 ) = G(z). Thus, we see
that G is doubly-periodic with poles kω1 + lω2 . By definition, this means that G is elliptic.
Moreover,
X 1 X 1
G(−z) = 2 3
= 2 = −G(z).
0
(z + ω) 0
(z − ω)3
ω∈Λ ω∈Λ
Hence G is odd.
We now introduce the Weierstrass function ℘ as
1 X 1 1
℘(z) = 2
+ 2
− 2.
z 0
(z − ω) ω
ω∈Λ
Observe that ℘0 (z) = G(z). It follows that ℘ is an even function. From the above we have
that ℘0 (z) = ℘0 (z + ω1 ) for all z. Notice that the number 12 ω is not a pole of ℘. Integrating
the periodicity identity for ℘0 , we obtain
℘(z) = ℘(z + ω1 ) + c.
In particular, ℘(− 12 ω1 ) = ℘( 12 ω1 ) + c. The function ℘ is even, hence c = 0. The Weierstrass

function has a pole of order two for z = 0 and no more poles inside the period-parallelogram
with 0 as a node. All this means that ℘ is an elliptic function of order two.
We will now prove an important property of the Weierstrass function.
Theorem 4.14 The Weierstrass function ℘ satisfies the differential equation
℘0 (z)2 = 4℘(z)3 − g2 ℘(z) − g3 , (10)
where X 1 X 1
g2 = 60 and g3 = 140 .
0
ω4 0
ω6
ω∈Λ ω∈Λ
The numbers g2 and g3 are called invariants.
Proof Make a Laurent expansion of ℘ at z = 0. Since odd terms in the sum cancel, we
obtain
1 X 1 X 1 1 g2 g3
℘(z) = 2 + 3z 2 4
+ 5z 4 6
+ . . . = 2 + z2 + z4 + . . . .
z 0
ω 0
ω z 20 28
ω∈Λ ω∈Λ
This gives
2 g2 g3
℘0 (z) = − 3
+ z + z3 + . . . ,
z 10 7
4 ³ g 2 g3 ´
℘0 (z)2 = 6 1 − z 4 − z 6 + . . . ,
z 10 7
3 1³ 3g2 4 3g3 6 ´
℘(z) = 6 1 + z + z + ... ,
z 20 28
and hence that
℘0 (z)2 − 4℘(z)3 − g2 ℘(z) = −g3 + Az 2 + Bz 4 + . . . ,
where A and B are constants. The left hand side is an elliptic function, and in view of the
right hand side, it is entire, and hence a constant. Thus A = B = 0. ¤
If we differentiate (10), we see that all the derivatives of ℘ can be expressed in terms of
℘ and ℘0 . For example,
2℘00 ℘0 = 12℘0 ℘2 − g2 ℘0
After division with 2℘0 , we get
℘00 = 6℘2 − 21 g2 . (11)
The right hand side of the differential equation (10) is a third degree polynomial in ℘(z),
so it can be factorized as
4℘(z)3 + g2 ℘(z) − g3 = 4(℘(z) − z1 )(℘(z) − z2 )(℘(z) − z3 ).

4.2 The Weierstrass ℘ function 31
To determine z1 , z2 , and z3 , we have to find the zeros of ℘0 (z) in a period parallelogram.

Putting z = − 21 ω1 in the identity ℘0 (z) = ℘0 (z + ω1 ) and remembering that the derivative is
odd gives ℘0 ( 12 ω1 ) = 0. In a similar manner one can show that 21 ω2 and 12 (ω1 + ω2 ) are also
zeros of ℘0 . There cannot be any other zeros in a period parallelogram, because the order
of ℘0 is three. The values of ℘(z) at these points are all distinct, because if for example
℘( 21 ω1 ) = ℘( 12 (ω1 + ω2 )),
then the second order elliptic function ℘(z) − ℘( 21 ω1 ) would have two second order zeros
counted according to multiplicity, which is impossible. Therefore we have
z1 = ℘( 21 ω1 ), z2 = ℘( 12 ω2 ), and z3 = ℘( 12 (ω1 + ω2 )).
Definition 4.15 The discriminant, D, of a general nth degree polynomial
P (x) = cn xn + cn−1 xn−1 + . . . + c1 x + c0
is defined to be Y
D = cn2n−2 (xi − xj )2 ,
1≤j<i≤n
where xi are the roots of the polynomial.

If x1 , x2 , and x3 are the roots of a general third degree equation, then the discriminant
is D = c43 (x1 − x2 )2 (x2 − x3 )2 (x3 − x1 )2 . It is obvious that if the discriminant 6= 0, then the
equation has three distinct roots.
If we take our third degree equation, then we have c3 = 4, c2 = 0, 3c1 = −g2 , and
c0 = −g3 . Using the relationship between roots and coefficients we see that the discriminant
for this equation is g32 − g23 /27. From this fact it follows that if g23 − 27g32 6= 0, g2 and g3
determine a Weierstrass function such that the right hand side of (10) has three distinct
zeroes.
Example 4.16 Consider the function
f (z) = ℘(z)℘0 (z) + ℘(z)2 − 1.
This is an elliptic function of order 5. We know that it takes every value five times inside
a period parallelogram, and in particular it takes the value zero five times.
The fifth degree equation
4x5 − x4 − g2 x3 + (2 − g3 )x2 − 1 = 0
can be written as
x2 (4x3 − g2 x − g3 ) − x4 + 2x2 − 1 = 0.
If we put x = ℘(zj ), where zj is one of the five zero of f , and use the differential equation
(10) for ℘(z) , we get
℘(zj )2 ℘0 (zj )2 − (℘(zj )2 − 1)2 = ℘(zj )2 ℘0 (zj )2 − ℘(zj )2 ℘0 (zj )2 = 0.
Thus the function f has five points that solve a fifth degree equation. This shows that the
elliptic functions seem to have the properties we were looking for at the beginning of this
chapter. This observation will be extended in the next section.
There are other functions that are connected to the Weierstrass function. These are the
Weierstrass ζ and σ functions which are defined by the expressions
Z z Z z
1 1 σ(z) 1
ζ(z) = − ℘(t) − 2 dt and ln = ζ(t) − dt.
z 0 t z 0 t
The zeta function is an meromorphic function with simple poles. It is not doubly periodic
but it is odd. The sigma function is an entire function with simple zeros.
Another important class of functions in the theory of elliptic functions are the elliptic
modular functions. One studies a function depending on a parameter τ , with Im(τ ) > 0,
under certain transformations, for example a Moebius transformation. We get these different
functions when we transform the function and they form a group called the modular group.
An example of a elliptic modular function is
g2 (1, τ )3
J(τ ) = ,
g2 (1, τ )3 − 27g3 (1, τ )2
where g2 and g3 are the invariants of ℘ and τ = ω2 /ω1 . With the aid of modular functions
one can prove Theorem 4.25 below.
We end this section by showing a connection between elliptic functions and elliptic
integrals.
Definition 4.17 An integral

dx
Z
p ,
P (x)
where P (x) is polynomial of degree ≤ 4, is called elliptic.
If we have an integral
∞
dt
Z
u= √ , (12)
x 4t3 − at − b
where a and b are constants, then it is, by definition, an elliptic integral. If the constants
a and b satisfy a3 − 27b2 6= 0, we can take them as invariants and construct a Weierstrass
function.
If we see x as a function of u, then one might wonder if x is an elliptic function. It is,
and to prove this, make the substitution t = ℘(v). Then we get the integral
Z v
u= dv
0
We get u = v, but this implies that ℘(u) = x, so x is an elliptic function of u as asserted.

Thus, in this case, an elliptic integral is the inverse of an elliptic function.
4.3 Solving the quintic

If g23 − 27g32 6= 0, then it is possible to construct a Weierstrass function, see Akhiezer [1] for
the details. In this section, we choose g2 = 0 and g3 = c 6= 0. To get g2 = 0, choose for
example ω2 /ω1 = e2πi/3 . In Chapter 2, we claimed that the general fifth degree equation
can be transformed to the form
P (x) = x5 + cx + c = 0. (13)
4.3 Solving the quintic 33
Recall from algebra that a polynomial has a double zero if and only if the zero is a zero to
the derivative of the polynomial. The derivative of P is 5x4 + c. Using long division on P
and P 0 , we get
x5 + cx + c = (5x4 + c) 51 x + ( 45 cx + c).
If we have a double zero, it follows that
c( 54 x + 1) = 0,
and we have
5 55
x=− and c=− .
4 44
We now define the elliptic function fc by
√ √
fc (z) = ℘(z)℘0 (z) + i c℘(z) + 2i c.
The order of fc is five, so it assumes every value five times inside a period parallelogram.
Especially, there are five points zj , j = 1, 2, . . . , 5, counted according to multiplicity, were
fc takes the value zero.
Lemma 4.18 The numbers ℘(zj ) are the roots to the equation x5 + cx + c = 0.
√ √
Proof Since fc (zj ) = 0, we have ℘(zj )℘0 (zj ) = −i c℘(zj ) − 2i c. If we square both
sides, we can use the differential equation for ℘. This manipulation gives
℘(zj )2 (4℘(zj )3 − c) = −c℘(zj )2 − 4c℘(zj ) − 4c.
The ℘2 term cancel, whence

℘(zj )5 + c℘(zj ) + c = 0,
so ℘(zj ) solves the equation as asserted. ¤
5
If we can show that fc (zj ) has five simple zeros for c 6= − 544 , then we are very close to
solving (13).
Lemma 4.19 If c 6= −55 /44 , then the function fc has five simple zeros.
Proof Assume on the contrary that c 6= −55 /44 and that fc has a double root, that is
√ √
fc (zj ) = ℘(zj )℘0 (zj ) + i c℘(zj ) + 2i c = 0,
√
fc0 (zj ) = ℘0 (zj )2 + ℘(zj )℘00 (zj ) + i c℘0 (zj ) = 0.
Now use the differential equation (10) and the formula (11) for the second derivative of ℘.
Then the derivative becomes
√
fc0 (zj ) = 10℘(zj )3 + i c℘0 (zj ) − c = 0. (14)
From the first equation we have

√ √
0 i c℘(zj ) + 2i c
℘ (zj ) = − .
℘(zj )
Substituting this expression into (14), we get ℘(zj )4 = −c/5, that is

P 0 (℘(zj ) = 5℘(zj )4 + c = 0,
where P is as above. But by Lemma 4.18, ℘(zj ) is a root of x5 + cx + c = 0. By the
discussion above c = −55 /44 , which is a contradiction to what we assumed. ¤
We must show that if z1 and z2 are distinct zeros of fc , then ℘(z1 ) 6= ℘(z2 ). If we can
show this, then we have solved (13)! We need another three lemmas.
Lemma 4.20 If z1 6= z2 and ℘(z1 ) = ℘(z2 ), then ℘0 (z1 ) = −℘0 (z2 ).
Proof By Theorem 4.12 and the fact that the ℘ has only one pole of order two at zero,
we have z1 + z2 = mω1 + nω2 , where m and n are integers. Thus z2 = mω1 + nω2 − z1 . The
derivative ℘0 is periodic and odd. Thus
℘0 (z2 ) = ℘0 (mω1 + nω2 − z1 ) = ℘0 (−z1 ) = −℘0 (z1 ). ¤
Lemma 4.21 If z1 , z2 are distinct zeros of fc , then ℘(z1 ) 6= ℘(z2 ).
Proof Suppose that ℘(z1 ) = ℘(z2 ) with z1 = 6 z2 . Then
0 √ √
fc (z1 ) = ℘(z1 )℘ (z1 ) + i c℘(z1 ) + 2i c = 0.
By the previous lemma, we can write the equality fc (z2 ) = 0 as
√ √
fc (z2 ) = −℘(z1 )℘0 (z1 ) + i c℘(z1 ) + 2i c = 0.
Subtracting this from the first equality yields
2℘(z1 )℘0 (z1 ) = 0.
But ℘(z1 ) 6= 0, because c 6= 0, whence ℘0 (z1 ) = 0. This means that the function ℘(z)−℘(z1 )
assumes the value 0 three times counted according to multiplicity, since it has a double zero
at z1 and a simple zero at z2 . But the order of ℘(z) − ℘(z1 ) is two, so we have obtained a
contradiction. ¤
Lemma 4.22 If c = 55 /44 , then fc has a double and three simple zeros.
Proof Because ℘ is elliptic it assumes every value, so there is a point√z1 such that
℘(z1 ) = −5/4. Using the differential equation for ℘, we have ℘0 (z1 ) = ± 16
15 5. Using the
numerical values of c, ℘(z1 ), and ℘0 (z1 ), we get
fc (z1 ) = fc0 (z1 ) = 0
and fc00 (z1 ) 6= 0. The other zeroes xi , i = 1, 2, 3, to the quintic are simple, and there are
numbers zi , i = 1, 2, 3 such that ℘(zi ) = xi . As above one can show that they are zeroes
to fc . From Lemma 4.21 we conclude that they are distinct. Hence fc has one double and
three simples zeroes and we have proved the lemma. ¤
We have now proved the following theorem,

Theorem 4.23 The numbers ℘(zj ), i = 1, . . . , 5, where fc (zj ) = 0, solve the quintic equa-
tion x5 + cx + c = 0.
There are of course problems making this theory work in practice. We will look at this
in Chapter 6. There we will need some theory about theta functions, which we deal with
in the next section.
4.4 Theta functions 35
4.4 Theta functions

Theta functions are entire functions with one ordinary period and one quasi period. A
function is quasi periodic if it shows a simple behaviour when one adds a multiple of a
complex number ω. For example, a function is quasi periodic if
f (z + ω) = z 2 f (z), for all z ∈ C.
We define a function
∞
2 τ +2mz)πi
X
θ3 (z, τ ) = e(m , Im(τ ) > 0.
m=−∞
Since Re(iτ ) < 0, it follows that the series converges uniformly in every set |z| ≤ R, where
R is a real number. One often puts q = eiπτ . Then we have
∞
2
X
θ3 (z, τ ) = q m e2πimz .
m=−∞
If we replace z with z + 1 in the function above, we get the same series. Therefore θ 3 (z) =
θ3 (z + 1), so θ3 is periodic. Now, if we substitute z + τ for z above, we get
∞
2 τ +2mz)πi+2iπmτ
X
θ3 (z + τ, τ ) = e(m .
m=−∞
After some algebraic manipulations, we can write

∞
2 τ +2(m+1)z)πi
X
θ3 (z + τ, τ ) = e −πτ −2πiz
e((m+1) = e−πτ −2πiz θ3 (z, τ ).
m=−∞
This shows that θ3 is an entire and a quasi-periodic function.

There are three other theta-functions connected to θ3 :
∞
X 1 2
θ1 (z, τ ) = i (−1)m q (m− 2 ) e(2m−1)πiz ,
m=−∞
∞
X 1 2
θ2 (z, τ ) = (−1)m q (m− 2 ) e(2m−1)πiz ,
m=−∞
∞
2
X
θ4 (z, τ ) = (−1)m q m e2mπiz .
m=−∞
The zeros of these functions are:

θ1 θ2 θ3 θ4
1 1 1
m + nτ m + nτ + 2 m + (n + 2 )τ + 2 m + (n + 12 )τ
where m and n are integers.
Theorem 4.24 The function θ4 can be expanded in an infinite product as
∞
Y
θ4 (z, τ ) = c (1 − q 2m−1 e2πiτ )(1 − q 2m−1 e−2πiτ ).
m=1
Proof Consider the function

∞
Y
f (x) = (1 − k 2m−1 x)(1 − k 2m−1 x−1 ), x ∈ C,
m=1
were k is a constant with |k| < 1. It converges absolutely for x 6= 0, as can be seen by
comparison with the series
∞
X
log |1 − k 2m−1 x||1 − k 2m−1 x|.
m=1
Notice that f satisfies the functional equation
f (x) = −kxf (k 2 x).
If we expand f in a Laurent series and use this fact, we get

∞
X ∞
X
f (x) = aj xj = − aj k 2j+1 xj+1 ,
j=−∞ j=−∞
2
from which it follows that aj = a0 (−1)j k j , and hence that
∞
2
X
f (x) = a0 (−1)j k j xj .
j=−∞
Then we have
∞
2
X
2πiz
f (e ) = a0 (−1)j k j e2πijz .
j=−∞
By putting q = k, this equals a0 θ4 , and we have proved the theorem. ¤

To find the value of the constant c = a0 , see Akhiezer [1].
We can in a similar way find product expansions for the other theta functions. If we
put k = q, then we have
∞
Y
θ1 (z, τ ) = 2cq 1/4 sin(πz) (1 − q 2m e2πiz )(1 − q 2m e−2πiz ),
m=1
Y∞
θ2 (z, τ ) = 2cq 1/4 cos(πz) (1 + q 2m e2πiz )(1 + q 2m e−2πiz ),
m=1
∞
Y
θ3 (z, τ ) = c (1 + q 2m−1 e2πiz )(1 + q 2m−1 e−2πiz ),
m=1
Y∞
θ4 (z, τ ) = c (1 − q 2m−1 e2πiz )(1 − q 2m−1 e−2πiz ),
m=1
where
∞
Y
c= (1 − q 2m ),
m=1
4.5 History of elliptic functions 37
see Akhiezer [1]

2
Because of the factor q m , theta series converges rapidly. They are well suited for
calculating elliptic functions such as Weierstrass ℘ function. In fact, we can use theta
functions to construct Weierstrass function ℘. Briefly, we can proceed as follows. First
choose the invariants g2 and g3 . By the differential equation (10), they determine a function
℘(z, ω1 , ω2 ). The right hand side of the differential equation is an ordinary third degree
polynomial with three roots zi , i = 1, 2, 3. By using properties of theta functions, we can
derive the equality
z1 − z 2 θ4 (0, τ )
= ;
z1 − z 3 θ3 (0, τ )
see Wang and Guo [26]. This equation determines τ . By again considering the differential
equation, we get the following expression
θ2 (z, τ )2 θ3 (0, τ )θ4 (0, τ )

℘(z, ω1 , ω2 ) = + z1 .
θ1 (z, τ )2
For more details, see Wang and Guo [26]. These formulas will be used in Chapter 6, where
we study an algorithm for solving the quintic.
4.5 History of elliptic functions

Karl Friedrich Gauss (1777–1855) and Adrien-Marie Legendre (1772–1833) investigated
elliptic integrals around 1800. Later Niels Henrik Abel (1802–1829) and Karl Jacobi (1804–
1851) observed that if one inverts elliptic integrals, then one gets interesting functions. The
name “elliptic” integral has its origin in the fact that the arclength of an ellipse is given by
an elliptic integral.
Both Jacobi and Abel observed that these inverse functions are doubly periodic and that
this was a really characteristic feature. Abel presented his investigation in 1827 in Crelle’s
journal. In 1829 Jacobi presented the first book of elliptic functions, Fundamenta Nova
Theoriae Functionum Ellipticaum. Gauss had 20 years earlier found similar results, but
he did not publish them. Karl Weierstrass (1815–1897) studied the relationship between
complex analysis and elliptic functions. Weierstrass also developed more general theory and
invented his famous elliptic function ℘.
We just mention that Leonhard Euler (1707-1783) and Jacobi Bernoulli (1654–1705)
investigated the theta functions.
The first mathematician to use elliptic functions in the theory of the quintic were Charles
Hermite (1822–1901), Leopold Kronecker (1823–1891), Francesco Brioschi (1824–1897), and
Paul Gordan (1837–1912). Hermite, Kronecker, and Brioschi used the same techniques and
had similar ideas. Hermite was the first to publish these ideas. See Chapter 5 for more
details about these different solution methods to the quintic.
These methods for solving the quintic were examined by the German mathematician
Felix Klein (1849-1925) in his famous book Vorlesungen über das Icosahedron from 1884.
In this book Klein investigated Hermite’s and Gordan’s methods and made their results
more transparant. Klein examined the different ways for partitioning the icosahedron and
how they can be used to solve the quintic. One can compare this book with Lagrange’s
Réflexions sur la résolution algèbrique des équations, mentioned in Chapter 3. Lagrange
examined all previous attempts to solve the quintic, and at that time one was not even sure
if it was at all possible to solve the equation. About a hundred years later, Klein examined
all the previous methods for solving the quintic. For more information about Klein’s book,
see [12].
In Chapter 6, we study an algorithm due to Ludwig Kiepert (1846–1934). Kiepert
discovered many formulas in the theory of elliptic functions. His algorithm for solving the
quintic equation was presented in 1883.
During the last century, a lot has happened both in Galois theory and in the theory of
special functions. Group theory was developed and was given its modern form. More ways
of solving the quintic using special functions were developed. The development of com-
puters led to more and better algorithms for solving polynomial equations in an iterative
way. Bruce King and E. Rodney Canfield at Georgia University implemented Kiepert’s al-
gorithm on a microcomputer in the 1980’s. The commercial program package Mathematica
implemented Hermite’s algorithm for solving the quintic in 1994.
Kronecker believed that there would be a general theorem for expressing the roots of
any polynomial with elliptic functions, but he did not find any theorem of this kind. But
in 1983, Hiroshi Umemura proved a general formula for the nth degree equation. We just
state his theorem here.
Theorem 4.25 Let
P (x) = xn + cn−1 xn−1 + . . . + c1 x + c0 = 0.
Then a root of the polynomial is given by the following expression.

· µ1 ¶¸ · µ1 1 ¶¸
0 ... 0 4 ... 0
θ 2 (Ω ) θ 2 2 (Ω4 )
0 0 ... 0 0 0 ... 0
· µ ¶¸ · µ 1 ¶¸
0 0 ... 0 4 0 2 ... 0
+ θ (Ω ) θ (Ω4 )
0 0 ... 0 0 0 ... 0
· µ ¶¸ · µ 1 ¶¸
0 0 ... 0 4 0 2 ... 0
θ 1 (Ω ) θ 1 (Ω4 )
2 0 ... 0 2 0 ... 0
− · µ1 ¶¸ · µ1 1 ¶¸
0 . . . 0 . . . 0
2 θ 2 (Ω4 ) θ 2 2 (Ω4 )
0 0 ... 0 0 0 ... 0
where Ω is the period matrix of the hyperelliptic curve y 2 = F (x), and F (x) = x(x − 1)P (x)
if the degree of P (x) is odd, and F (x) = x(x − 1)(x − 2)P (x), otherwise.
For a proof, see Mumford [17].

These formulas are complicated and need a lot of memory in a computer, so they are
not practically useful. Furthermore, it may be difficult to find the period matrix Ω. More
useful algorithms for solving the quintic are examined in the next two chapters.
39
5 Hermite’s and Gordan’s solutions to the quintic

In this chapter we will briefly examine two different methods for solving the quintic. These
methods are due to C. Hermite and P. Gordan.
5.1 Hermite’s solution to the quintic

Hermite realized that to transform a quintic equation to the Bring–Jerrard form (6), one
only has to solve cubics to make the substitution. There already existed a formula for
solving a third degree equation
x3 − 3x + 2c0 = 0, c0 ∈ R,
where c0 where expressed by trigonometric functions. By observing the similar form of this
equation and the Bring–Jerrard quintic, he thought that a corresponding formula would
exist for the quintic. We can summarize his technique as follows. Define the numbers k
and k 0 by
z2 − z 3 z1 − z 2
k2 = and (k 0 )2 = 1 − k 2 = ,
z1 − z 2 z1 − z 3
where the numbers zi are the roots to (10) for a Weierstrass function with periods ω 1 and
ω2 . The number k 2 can also be expressed by theta functions in the following way where we
put τ = ω1 /ω2 :
θ2 (0, τ )4
k2 = ;
θ3 (0, τ )4
see Wang and Guo [26]. We define the following functions:
s
√
4 θ2 (0, τ )
ϕ(τ ) = k = ,
θ3 (0, τ )
s
√
4 θ4 (0, τ )
ψ(τ ) = k0 = .
θ3 (0, τ )
Observe that
ϕ(τ )8 + ψ(τ )8 = 1,
because k 2 + (k 0 )2 = 1. We then define the parameters
u = ϕ(nτ ) and v = ϕ(τ ),
where n is an integer. These parameters are linked by an equation of degree n + 1 known

as the modular equation. The roots to this equation are
µ ¶
τ + 16m
u1 = ²ϕ(nτ ) and um = ϕ , m = 2, 3, . . . , n − 1,
n
where ² is 1 if 2 is a quadratic residue to n and ² = −1 otherwise. For the case n = 5, the

modular equation can be expressed in u and v as
v 6 − u6 + 5v 2 u2 (v 2 − u2 ) + 4uv(1 − v 4 u4 ) = 0.
40 5 HERMITE’S AND GORDAN’S SOLUTIONS TO THE QUINTIC
To relate this sixth degree equation with the Bring–Jerrard form, Hermite defined the
function
µ µ ¶¶ µ µ ¶ µ ¶¶ µ µ ¶ µ ¶¶
5 τ + 16 τ + 64 τ + 32 τ + 48
Φ(τ ) = ϕ (5τ ) + ϕ ϕ −ϕ ϕ −ϕ .
τ 5 5 5 5
Because of the definition of ϕ, it is built up by theta functions. Therefore, if we, for example,
replace τ with τ /5, ϕ will have a regular behaviour. Therefore,
µ ¶ µ ¶ µ ¶ µ ¶
5 τ + 16 τ + 32 τ + 48
Φ (5τ ) , Φ , Φ , Φ , and Φ ,
τ 5 5 5
are the roots of the quintic

√
Φ5 − 200 ϕ(τ )4 ψ(τ )16 Φ − 1600 5 ϕ(τ )3 ψ(τ )16 (1 + ϕ(τ )8 ) = 0.
√4
By making the substitution Φ = 22 53 ϕ(τ )ψ(τ )4 x, we get the quintic
2(1 + ϕ(τ )8 )
x5 − x − √
4 5
= 0.
5 ϕ(τ )2 ψ(τ )4
Therefore, if we have transformed a general quintic to the form
x5 − x − a0 = 0,
we have to determine τ so that

2(1 + ϕ(τ )8 )
a0 = √
4 5
.
5 ϕ(τ )2 ψ(τ )4
This can be done by taking k as one root of the roots to
k 4 + z 2 k 3 + 2k 2 − z 2 k + 1 = 0,
√4
where z = a0 55 /2. When we have found this value for k, we can calculate the value of τ
from the definition of ϕ. The roots of the Bring–Jerrard quintic can then be expressed as
ϕ(τ + 16k)
xk = √
4 4 3
, k = 0, 1, . . . , 4.
2 5 ϕ(τ )2 ψ(τ )4
By using the series expansions of the functions involved above, one finds that this way
of calculating the roots gives series that converge very rapidly. For more details and a
derivation of the last expression, see King [11] and Prasolov and Solovyev [20].
5.2 Gordan’s solutions to the quintic

Gordan used a different technique which did not depend on the difficult Tschirnhaus trans-
formation. Gordan considered a regular icosahedron inscribed in the Riemann sphere, with
its nodes on the sphere. An icosahedron has 20 triangular faces, 12 vertices, and 30 edges
(5 edges meeting at each vertex); see Figure 3. It is also one of the five platonic solids. If
we take a solid and join the centres of each pair of adjacent faces with an edge, we get a
new solid denoted the dual. If we do this for a cube we get an octahedron inscribed in the
5.2 Gordan’s solutions to the quintic 41
cube. Doing the same thing with an octahedron gives a cube inscribed in it. Any symmetry
of a solid is clearly a symmetry of the dual. The dual of the icosahedron is the dodecahe-
dron which has 12 pentagonal faces, 30 edges, and 20 vertices (three edges meeting at each
vertex). Using distance preserving maps, which we dealt with in Chapter 3, shows that the
symmetry group of the icosahedron has order 60. The order of A5 is also 60, and one can
show that they are isomorphic; see Shurman [22]. Therefore we can view the icosahedron as
concrete picture of the group A5 . In Chapter 3, we saw that the unsolvability of the quintic
was connected to the group A5 . Because of this fact, when we study the icosahedral group,
we are also studying the quintic.
We now consider polyhedral polynomials. They are polynomials with roots that lie on
• the vertices,
• the midpoints of the edges,
• the midpoints of the faces

of a polyhedron inscribed in the Riemann sphere.
©©H
¡@ @HH
©©¡ »X
» X @ HH
©»© ¡
» ·T X
X H
»©»© ¡ @ H
X H
X
C@
C ¡ · T @ ¡¤¤
@¡ @.¡
¤T · T ·C
CC ¤ T · C ¤¤
¤ T
· ·
T C
¤ T · C
¤ CC· T · T ¤¤ C
¤ T · C
¤
¤X T · C
H XXX » » »C
©
HH XX T · »»» ©
HH XX · » ©©
T.»
©
HH ©©
H©
An icosahedron
Figure 3
Often one expresses equations involving polyhedral polynomials in homogeneous form, that
is
xn + cn−1 xn−1 + . . . + c1 x + c0 = 0 ⇔ un + cn−1 un−1 v + . . . + c1 uv n−1 + c0 v n = 0.
This corresponds to the substitution x = u/v. A homogeneous polynomial is often de-

noted a form, and the degree is the order of the form. The polyhedral polynomials for the
icosahedron are
Vertices f = uv(u10 + 11u5 v 5 − v 10 ),
Edges T = u30 + 522u25 v 5 − 10005u20 v 10 − 10005u10 v 20 − 522u5 v 25 + v 30 ,
Faces H = −u20 + 228u15 v 5 − 494u10 v 10 − 228u5 v 15 − v 20 ;
see [11] for a derivation. Observe that the order of each form is equal to the number of
faces, edges, and vertices, respectively.
42 5 HERMITE’S AND GORDAN’S SOLUTIONS TO THE QUINTIC
An important relation between these polyhedral polynomials is the equality
1728f 5 − H 3 − T 2 = 0. (15)
Gordan expressed the different permutations of the icosahedron with the help of a complex
fifth root, ω = cos 2π 2π
5 + i sin 5 , and the variables u and v. He then expressed the same
rotations of the icosahedron with ω 2 and variables denoted w and z. This gives another set
of permutations of the icosahedron. Gordan then constructed following function:
ξ = u3 w2 z + u2 vz 3 + uv 2 w3 − v 3 wz 2 ,
which is unchanged by the permutations of the icosahedron. From this function Gordan
found two other functions, φ and ψ, with the help of techniques from invariant theory. He
then could derive a principal quintic in these three functions:
x5 + 5ξx2 − 5φx − ψ = 0.
The roots to this equations can now be expressed in the variables u, v, w, and z. Using
these roots he was able to derive another equation:
H
y 5 − 10y 3 + 45y − p = 0,
f5
√
where H and f are parameters. By making the substitution y = t f one gets a Brioschi
quintic (see Chapter 6):
t5 − 10ωt3 + 45ω 2 t − ω 2 = 0,
where ω is a parameter. It is possible to solve this equation with the help of elliptic functions
and by a partition of the icosahedron. This is done in Kiepert’s algorithm which we study
in Chapter 6. For more details, see King [11].
43
6 Kiepert’s algorithm for the quintic

In this chapter we will study L. Kiepert’s algorithm for solving the quintic equation. It gives
good insight in how to use elliptic functions and Tschirnhaus transformation in practice.
6.1 An algorithm for solving the quintic

In Chapter 4 we saw that we could use the Weierstrass function for solving the quintic. There
are problems with using this technique: we need a difficult Tschirnhaus transformation
and we need to find the location of the five points that solves the equation in the period
parallelogram. Kiepert used another method. Briefly there are five steps:
• Transform the general quintic into a principal quintic.
• Transform the principal quintic to a one parameter Brioschi quintic.
• Transform the Brioschi quintic into a Jacobi sextic.
• Solve the Jacobi sextic with Weierstrass elliptic functions.
• Reverse the transformations.
The different types of equations will be explained below.
The principal quintic: Consider an arbitrary fifth degree equation
x5 + c4 x4 + c3 x3 + c2 x2 + c1 x + c0 = 0. (16)
First we transform (16) into a principal quintic by the transformation
z = x2 − ux + v. (17)
We then get
z 5 + 5a2 z 2 + 5a1 z + a0 = 0. (18)
The formulas for the transformation are
5a2 = −c2 (u3 + c4 u2 + c3 u + c2 ) + c1 (4u2 + 3c4 u + 2c3 ) − c0 (5u + 2c4 ) − 10v 3 ,

5a1 = c1 (u4 + c4 u3 + c3 u2 + c2 u + c1 ) − c0 (5u3 + 4c4 u2 + 3c3 u + 2c2 ) − 5v 4 − 10a2 v,
a0 = −c0 (u5 + c4 u4 + c3 u3 + c2 u2 + c1 u + c0 ) − v 5 − 5a2 v 2 − 5a1 v,
where u is a root of the second order equation
(2c24 − 5c3 )u2 + (4c34 − 13c4 c3 + 15c2 )u + 2c44 − 8c24 c3 + 10c4 c2 + 3c23 − 10c1 = 0,
and v is defined by
−c4 u − c24 + 2c3
v= .
5
The Brioschi quintic: A Brioschi equation is an equation of the form
x5 − 10w1 x3 + 45w12 x − w22 = 0,

44 6 KIEPERT’S ALGORITHM FOR THE QUINTIC
where w1 and w2 are parameters. We now transform the equation (18) to the Brioschi form
y 5 − 10wy 3 + 45w 2 y − w2 = 0, (19)
where w is a parameter. We obtain this by putting

λ + µyk
zk = , k = 1, 2, . . . , 5. (20)
yk2 /w − 3
The parameters are obtained from
(a22 + a2 a1 a0 − a31 )λ2 + (−11a32 a1 + a2 a20 − 2a21 a0 )λ + 64a22 a21 − 27a32 a0 − a1 a20 = 0,
and
(a2 λ2 − 3a1 λ − 3a0 )3
V = ,
a22 (λa2 a0 − λa21 − a1 a0 )
1
w= ,
1728 − V
V a22 − 8λ3 a2 − 72λ2 a1 − 72λa0
µ= .
λ2 a2 + λa1 + a0
In the equation for λ it suffices to solve the equation and take one of the two roots.
To understand and find the transformation (20) one studies the polyhedral polynomials
mentioned in Section 4.5. Briefly we do the following. We use the midpoints of the edges
of the icosahedron to divide it into five octahedrons. We then find the vertex and face
polynomials for these octahedrons. The expressions for them are
tk = ²3k u6 + 2²2k u5 v − 5²k u4 v 2 − 5²4k u2 v 4 − 2²3k uv 5 + ²2k v 6 ,

Wk = −²4k u8 + ²3k u7 v − 7²2k u6 v 2 − 7²k u5 v 3 + 7²4k u3 v 5 − 7²3k u2 v 6 − ²2k uv 7 − ²k v 8 ,
where ² = e2πi/5 ; see King [11]. The vertex polynomials tk satisfy the Brioschi equation
t5 − 10f t3 + 45f 2 t − T = 0, (21)
where f and T are the vertex and edge polynomials for the icosahedron. By using this fact
and making the substitution
µ ¶ µ 3¶
λf µf
zk = Wk + tk W k ,
H HT
where f and T are as above and H is the face polynomial for the icosahedron, we can
obtain the coefficients of the principal quintic (18). By reverting these steps we get the
transformation (20). For details, see King [11].
The Jacobi equation: Consider the equation
y 6 − 10f y 3 + Hy + 5f 2 = 0, (22)
where f and H are parameters. It is denoted the Jacobi sextic equation. One can show
that if the parameters satisfy
1728f 5 − H 3 − T 2 = 0, (23)
6.1 An algorithm for solving the quintic 45
(compare with (15)) and the roots to the Jacobi sextic are denoted y ∞ and yi , i = 0, 1, . . . , 4,
then the roots to (21) (observe that f , T , and H are parameters now) can be expressed as
s
1
tk = √ (y∞ − yk )(yk+2 − yk+3 )(yk+4 − yk+1 ), k = 0, 1, . . . , 4, (24)
5
where the subscript are calculated modulo five. For a proof of this result, see Perron [19].
By noticing that (19) is a special case of (21), where f 2 = T and t = yT /f 2 , we only have
to solve (22) to get the solution to the quintic.
Solving the Jacobi sextic: We shall solve (22) using elliptic functions. We begin by
expressing the coefficients of (21) in terms of the elliptic invariants g2 and g3 . Put D =
g23 − 27g32 . Write the equation (21) in the form
10 3 45 216
t5 + t + 2 t − 3 g3 = 0. (25)
D D D
We then get the relationships
1 216g3
f= and T = .
D D3
Substituting this into the identity (23), we get
¶3
HD2
µ
D=− − 27g32 .
12
From this we can calculate H as

D − 27g32
µ ¶
3 3 12
H = 12 ⇒ H=− g2 .
D6 D
The Jacobi equation corresponding to (25) is then
10 3 12 5
y6 + y − 2 g2 y + 2 = 0. (26)
D D D
By comparing (25) with (19), we see that
1
D=− .
w
In order to solve (26), the key equation is
℘0 ℘00 ℘(3) ℘(4)

¯ ¯
¯ ¯
℘00 ℘(3) ℘(4) ℘(5)
¯ ¯
σ(5z) 1 ¯¯ ¯
= ¯ = 0, (27)
σ 25 (z) 2882 ¯¯ ℘(3) ℘(4) ℘(5) ℘(6) ¯
¯
¯ ℘(4) ℘(5) ℘(6) ℘(7) ¯
where σ is one of the Weierstrass functions mentioned in Chapter 4. This equation was
derived by Kiepert; see [10]. The values of z that are roots to this equation are z kl =
(kω1 + lω2 )/5, where ω1 and ω2 are the periods that corresponds to the invariants g2 and
g3 constructed above, and k and l are integers satisfying |k| + |l| 6= 0. There are 24 different
pairs k, l that gives different roots to this equation inside a period parallelogram of ℘.
Now expand the determinant (27) using the fact that the derivatives can be expressed
by ℘ and ℘0 ; see Section 4.2. We then arrive at the equation
((℘00 )2 − 12℘(℘0 )2 )3 − 16(℘0 )4 ℘00 ((℘00 )2 − 12℘(℘0 )2 ) − 64(℘0 )8 = 0, (28)
which is of degree 12 in ℘. These 12 roots correspond to the 24 values of z kl above by

℘(z−k−l ) = ℘(zkl ) because ℘ is an even function. We shall solve the equation (26) using
these roots. Put ℘kl = ℘(zkl ) andχkl = ℘2k2l − ℘kl . We will use the following formula due
to Weierstrass:
℘(z)0 ℘(z)(3) − (℘(z)00 )2
℘(z) − ℘(2z) = .
4(℘(z)0 )2
Using this equality and the fact that ℘00 and ℘(3) can be expressed by ℘ and ℘0 , we get the
following formula for χkl :
(℘00 )2 − 12℘kl (℘0kl )2
χkl = kl . (29)
4(℘0kl )2
We will now derive properties valid for every pair χkl , ℘kl . Therefore we will drop the
subscripts for χkl and ℘kl below. By substituting (29) into (28) we arrive at an equation
for
χ3 − ℘00 χ − (℘0 )2 = 0. (30)
If we solve for (℘00 )2 in (29) and use (30), we get
(℘00 )2 = (4χ + 12℘)(χ3 − ℘00 χ). (31)
Using the differential equation for ℘0 and the identity (11) in (30) and in (31) gives two
equations:
1
χ3 − (6℘2 − g2 )χ − (4℘3 − g2 ℘ − g3 ) = 0, (32)
2
1 2 1
(6℘ − g2 ) − (4χ + 12℘)(χ3 − 6℘2 χ + g2 χ) = 0.
2
(33)
2 2
Now introduce the variable ℘ = 1/2(z − χ). Use this in the expressions above and solve for
z 2 . We then get p
3z 2 = 5χ2 + g2 + 2χ 5χ2 + 3g2 .
Write equation (32) as

z(z 2 − 3χ2 − g2 ) = 2g3 .
Square this and use the expression for z 2 to get

p
5χ6 − 2χ5 5χ2 + 32 + g23 = 27g23 .
Rearranging, squaring, and using D = g23 − 27g32 , we have
5χ12 − 12g2 χ10 + 10Dχ6 + D2 = 0.

6.1 An algorithm for solving the quintic 47
To obtain (26), we introduce the variable χ2 = 1/s and multiply by s6 /D2 . From this we
can derive the following expression for the roots of (26):
¶¶−1
√
µ µ ¶ µ
2ω1 + 48kω2 4ω1 + 96ω2
sk = ℘ −℘ , (34)
5 5
¶¶−1
√
µ µ ¶ µ
2ω1 4ω1
s∞ = ℘ −℘ ; (35)
5 5
see Kiepert [10]. The thing to do know is to evaluate ℘ at these points, which means that
we must evaluate an infinite series. We do this with the help of theta functions. By using
the identity
z1 − z 2 θ4 (0, τ )4
=
z1 − z 3 θ3 (0, τ )4
(see Wang and Guo [26]), where zi is a root to the left hand side in the differential equation
(10) for ℘, and using the same differential equation and the fact that theta function can be
expanded as infinite products, one can derive the following formulas:
∞
√ 1 X 2 2
sj = (−1)m ²j(6m+1) q (6m+1) /60 , j = 0, 1, 2, 3, 4,
B m=−∞
√ ∞
√ 5 X 2
s∞ = (−1)m q 5(6m+1) /12 ,
B m=−∞
and
√ ∞
2
X
(−1)m q (6m+1) /12 ,
6
B= D
m=−∞
where ² = e2πi/5 and q = eπiω1 /ω2 . To find these expressions, one uses properties of the σ
functions. For a complete proof, see Akhiezer [1] and King [11].
We have now an algorithm for solving the general quintic using only its coefficients.
But one thing remains: we must find the periods of the elliptic functions since the formula
contains the factor q = eπiω1 /ω2 . In fact, it is sufficient to determine q. To do this we use
the elliptic integral (12) in the following way. Solve the equation
4x3 − g2 x − g3 = 0.
Denote the roots by z1 , z2 , and z3 . Then calculate

z2 − z 3 z1 − z 2
k2 = and (k 0 )2 = 1 − k 2 = . (36)
z1 − z 2 z1 − z 3
The number k 2 can also be expressed by theta functions in the following way:
θ2 (0, q)4
k2 = ;
θ3 (0, q)4
see Wang and Guo [26]. Now form the expression

√ √ √
1 − k0 4
z1 − z 3 − 4 z1 − z 2
2L = √ = √ √ .
1 + k0 4
z1 − z 3 + 4 z1 − z 2
With the help of theta function this can be written
θ2 (0, q 4 )
2L = .
θ3 (0, q 4 )
From this we have

q + q 9 + q 25 + . . .
L= ,
1 + 2q 4 + 2q 16 + . . .
whence
q = L + 2q 4 L − q 9 + 2q 16 L − q 25 + . . . .
By substituting
L + 2q 4 L − q 9 + 2q 16 L − q 25 + . . .
for the value of q in the right hand side, we have
q = L + 2L5 + 15L9 + 150L13 + 1707L17 + O(L21 ).
Even if L is close to 1, this expression gives a good numerical value for q. The expression in
L for q is denoted the Jacobi nome. When we solve (10) we get three roots. It is important
how we order the roots, because for half of the orderings we will get |q| > 1 and then
the series for the roots does not converge. We must therefore make a check of this if we
implement this method of solving the quintic on a computer. To be sure that we have done
everything right, we can carry out the multiplication
4
Y
(s − s∞ ) (s − sk ),
k=0
which should equal (26).
Reversing the transformations: We now only have to reverse the transformations that
we have done. Use
1
yk2 = √ (s∞ − sk )(sk+2 − sk+3 )(sk+4 − sk+1 ),
5
ω2
yk = 2 ,
yk + 10/Dyk2 + 45/D 2
where the first equation comes from (24) and the last is a rewritten version of (21). To
reverse the first transformation use the following equation derived by Kiepert
c0 + (zk − v)(u3 + c4 u2 + c3 u + c2 ) + (zk − v)2 (2u + c4 )

xk = − .
u4 + c4 u3 + c3 u2 + c2 u + c1 + (zk − v)(3u2 + 2c4 u + c3 ) + (zk − v)2
By writing the transformation (17) as
(x − u)2 = (z − v) − u(x − u),
one can derive an equation for xk which gives the equation above.
We now have a complete algorithm for solving the quintic.
6.2 Commentary about Kiepert’s algorithm 49
6.2 Commentary about Kiepert’s algorithm

As we have mentioned, B. King and R. Canfield rediscovered Kiepert’s work. They suc-
ceeded to implement it on a microcomputer in the beginning of the 1980’s. Since a lot has
happened in computing since that time, King believes that on a modern computer and with
a modern programming language, Kiepert’s algorithm would be fast and also give good
numerical values for the roots.
51
7 Conclusion
7.1 Conclusion
We have seen that algebraic equations have interested mathematicians for a long time. A
new era began when Galois proved the impossibility of solving equations of degree higher
than four, using only radicals. After this attention concentrated on finding other ways
of solving these equations. This was done in several ways, mainly using the theory of
special functions, such as elliptic and theta functions. This lead to several algorithms for
solving the quintic; these are presented in Chapter 5 and 6. These algorithms are not only
interesting from a theoretical point of view, but are also practically useful. The program
package Mathematica has already implemented a part of Hermite’s approach of solving
the quintic, and Kiepert’s algorithm has also been implemented on a computer. But these
solution methods only deal with the quintic. A goal for future research might be to find new
algorithms, or to simplify Umemuras solution, so that one can solve higher degree equations
in a similar way.
With this in mind we can finally say that polynomial equations have been a part of
mathematics for a long time, but there are still things to do; so they will certainly accom-
pany us into the 21th century.
52 7 CONCLUSION
53
Appendix
A Groups
Definition A.1 A nonempty set G, on which a binary operation ◦ is defined, is called a
group if, for arbitrary a, b, c ∈ G,
• (a ◦ b) ◦ c = a ◦ (b ◦ c) (associativity);
• there exists an element e ∈ G such that e ◦ a = a ◦ e = a (existence of an identity

element);
• for each a ∈ G there exists an element a−1 ∈ G such that a ◦ a−1 = a−1 ◦ a = e
(existence of inverse).
If a ◦ b = b ◦ a for all elements in G, then the group is called abelian . A subset H of G

that is closed with respect to the binary operation is a subgroup of G. A subgroup H such
that ghg −1 ∈ H for every g ∈ G and h ∈ H is a normal subgroup and this fact is denoted
H / G. A group is simple if the only normal subgroups are {e} and the group itself. A group
is cyclic if there exist a generator g so every element can be written in the form a = g n .
The number of elements in a group is its order and is denoted |G|.
Definition A.2 If (G, ◦ ) and (G1 , · ) are groups, then a mapping σ : G → G1 is called an
homomorphism if σ(a ◦ b) = σ(a) · σ(b) for every a, b ∈ G.
If σ also is a bijection, then the mapping is called an isomorphism, and if G = G1 , then

the mapping is called an automorphism. The kernel of a homomorphism is the set
ker(σ) = {k ∈ G : σ(k) = e},
and one can show that this is a normal subgroup of G.
Definition A.3 Let H be a subgroup of a group G and a an arbitrary element of G. Then

the right coset is Ha = {h ◦ a : h ∈ H} and similary the left coset is aH = {a ◦ h : h ∈ H}.
Two cosets aH and bH are equal if and only if ab−1 ∈ H. We have also that aH = bH or
aH ∩ bH = ∅, and the same is true for the left cosets. This means that the cosets will form
a partition of G. If H / G, then the distinct cosets form a group called the factor group and
is denoted G/H. By definition aH ◦ bH = a ◦ bH. If G is finite, then |Ha| = |aH| = |H|,
and we have the following famous theorem due to Lagrange.
Theorem A.4 Let H be a subgroup of G, then |H| divides |G|.
Next we state the isomorphism theorem.
Theorem A.5 Let σ : G → G1 be a homomorphism and K = ker(σ). Then we have an

isomorphism σ : G/K → σ(G) given by σ(Kg) = σ(g) for all Kg ∈ G/K.
54 C RINGS
B Permutation groups
The set of all permutations of the set {1, 2, 3, . . . , n} is called the symmetric group and is
deoted Sn . The order of Sn is n!. We write a permutation as
µ ¶
1 2 3 ... n
σ=
i1 i2 i3 . . . in
A permutation is called even or odd depending on the sign (±1) of

Y σ(k) − σ(i)
.
k−i
i<k
One can show that the permutations form a subgroup of Sn called the alternating group
and denoted An .
C Rings
A nonempty set R is said to form a ring with respect to two binary operations, often called
addition and multiplication and denoted by + and ∗, if the following holds:
• R is an abelian group with respect to addition;
• (a ∗ b) ∗ c = a ∗ (b ∗ c);
• a ∗ (b + c) = a ∗ b + a ∗ c;
• (b + c) ∗ a = b ∗ a + c ∗ a.
The identity element with respect to addition is denoted 0. A subset of R is called a

subring if it is closed with respect to the operations.
Definition C.1 We define char(R) to be the smallest integer such that n ∗ a = 0 for all
elements in R. If no such integer exists, then char(R) = 0.
Definition C.2 An element a 6= 0 is a divisor of zero if there exists an element b 6= 0 of R

such that a ∗ b = 0 or b ∗ a = 0.
We list some common types of rings.
• Commutative: A ring for which multiplication is commutative.
• Ring with unity: A ring with a multiplicative identity element. This element is
often denoted with 1.
• Integral domain: A commutative ring with unity having no divisors of zero.
• Field: A ring whose nonzero elements form an abelian multiplicative group.
Definition C.3 A subgroup H of a ring R having the property that r ∗ x ∈ H for all x ∈ H
and r ∈ R is called left ideal. Similary a subgroup H having the property x ∗ r ∈ H for all
x ∈ H and r ∈ R is called a right ideal. If a subgroup is both a left and right ideal, then it
is called an ideal.
55
Observe that the additative group is abelian, so the subgroups will be normal. If a
subgroup g is an ideal, we can define factor groups R/g = {r + g : r ∈ R} as the set of all
different cosets of g. This will in fact be a ring, denoted the factor ring.
Definition C.4 Assume that R and R1 are two rings, then a mapping σ : R → R1 is a
homomorphism if it preserves addition and multiplication.
The kernel of σ is the set ker(σ) = {k ∈ R : σ(k) = 0}.

There are a similar isomorphism theorems as for groups.
Theorem C.5 Let σ : R → R1 be a homomorphism and K = ker(σ). Then there exists an

isomorphism σ : R/K → σ(G) given by σ(K + g) = σ(g) for all K + g ∈ R/K.
D Polynomials
Let R be a ring and let x be any symbol not in R. By a polynomial in x over R is meant
an expression
n
X
n
P (x) = cn x + . . . + c1 x + c0 = cj x j .
j=0
Every cj xj is called a term and the coefficients of xn is denoted the leading coefficient. Two
polynomials are equal if every term are equal. If the operation in R are denoted by ◦ and ∗ ,
then we define addition as
f (x) ◦ g(x) = (f0 ◦ g0 ) + (f1 ◦ g1 )x + . . . + (fn ◦ gn )xn ,
and multiplication as
n µX
X k ¶
f (x) ∗ g(x) = (f0 ∗ g0 ) + (f0 ∗ g1 ◦ f1 ∗ g0 )x + . . . = fj ∗ gk−j xk .
k=0 j=0
With this operation, the polynomials form a ring denoted R[x].
Theorem D.1 (Division Algorithm) Let f, g ∈ R[x], where R is a ring. Suppose that
f 6= 0 and that the leading term in f is a unit. Then there exist uniquely determined
polynomials q and r such that
g =q∗f +r and r = 0 or deg(r) < deg(f ).
Definition D.2 Let f ∈ R[x] and a ∈ R. Then a is a root of f if f (a) = 0.
From complex analysis we have the following theorem
Theorem D.3 (Fundamental Theorem of Algebra) If f is a nonconstant polynomial

in C[x], then f has a root in C.
When a polynomial has a root, it is reducible in that ring. We end this section with a
useful criterion for when an polynomial in Z is irreducible in Q.
56 D POLYNOMIALS
Theorem D.4 (Eisenstein’s Criterion) Let P (x) = cn xn + cn−1 xn−1 + . . . + c1 x + c0 , be

a polynomial in Z, i.e., every ci ∈ Z. If there exists a prime p such that
• p divides each ci , i = 0, . . . , n − 1,
• p does not divide cn ,
• p2 does not divide c0 ,
then P is irreducible in Q[x].

REFERENCES 57
Commentary about the references

In the references I have put together the original articles by the inventors of the different
subjects in this field. If one wants to find other articles by these famous authors, then [12]
contains a list of them.
As I studied this subject, I realized L. Kiepert had done a lot of work in this area. He
wrote many papers about the quintic and elliptic functions, and, as we have seen, invented
an algorithm for solving the quintic. Despite this, he did not seem to exist; no historical
book had anything written about him. After hard effort I found a source about him, namely
the article [4]. I can also mention that he has written a famous calculus book, and was a
student of Weierstrass.
References
[1] Akhiezer, N., Elements of the Theory of Elliptic Functions, AMS, Rhode Island,
1990.
[2] Boyer, B. and Merzbach, C., A History of Mathematics, John Wiley & Sons, New
York, 1989.
[3] Brioschi F., Sur les équations du sixième degré, Acta math. 12 (1888), 83-101.
[4] Eddy, R. H., The Conics of Ludwig Kiepert – A Comprehensive Lesson in the Ge-
ometry of the Triangle, Math. Mag. 67 (1994), 188-205.
[5] Gordan, P., Sur les équations du cinquième degré, Journal de math. 1 (1885),
445–458.
[6] Gordan, P., Über Gleichungen fünften grades, Math. Annalen 28 1 (1887), 152–166.
[7] Hausner, A., The Bring-Jerrard Equation and Weierstrass Elliptic functions, Amer.
Math. Monthly 69 (1962), 193–196.
[8] Hermite, C., Sur l’équation du cinquième degré, C.R.A.S. Paris 48–49 (1865/66),
347–424.
[9] Kiepert, L., Auflösung der Gleichungen fünften grades, J. für Math. 87 (1878),
114–133.
[10] Kiepert, L., Wirkliche Ausführung der Ganzzahligen Multiplikation der Elliptischen
Funktionen, J. für Math. 76 (1873), 21–33.
[11] King, B., Beyond the Quartic Equation, Birkhäuser Verlag, Boston, 1996.
[12] Klein, F., Vorlesungen über das Ikosaeder , Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 1993.
[13] Klein, F., Weitere Untersuchungen über das Icosaeder, Math. Annalen 12 (1877),
503–560.
[14] Kronecker, L., Sur la résolution de l’équation du cinquième degré, C.R. Acad. Sci.
46 (1858), 1150–1152.
58 REFERENCES
[15] Kronecker, L., Über die classe der Gleichungen von denen die Theilung der ellip-
tischen Funktionen abhängt, Monatsberichte der Berliner Akad. der Wiss 4 (1879),
88–96.
[16] Morandi, S., Fields and Galois Theory, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1996.
[17] Mumford, D., Tata Lectures on Theta 2, Birkhäuser Verlag, Boston, 1984.
[18] Nicholson, W., Introduction to Abstract Algebra, PWS Publishing Company, Boston,
1993.
[19] Perron, O., Algebra II, Walter de Gruyter & Co, Berlin, 1933.
[20] Prasolov, V. and Solovyev, Y., Elliptic Functions and Elliptic Integrals, AMS,
Rhode Island, 1997.
[21] Rigatelli, T., Evariste Galois 1811-1832, Birkäuser Verlag, Basel, Boston, 1996.
[22] Shurman, M., Geometry of the Quintic, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1997.
[23] Slodowy, P., Das Ikosaeder und die Gleichungen fünften Grades, in Aritmetik und
Geometri: Vier Vorelesungen, Birkäuser Verlag, Basel, 1986.
[24] Stillwell, J., Mathematics and Its History, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1989.
[25] van der Waerden, B., Science Awakening, P. Noordhoff, Groningen, 1961.
[26] Wang, Z. X. and Guo, D. R., Special Functions, World Scientific, Singapore, 1989.
[27] Weierstrass, K. and Schwarz, H. A., Formeln und Lersätze zum Gebrauche der
Elliptischen Funktionen, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1893.
Avdelning, Institution Datum
Division, Department Date
Department of Mathematics 1998-06-12

Applied Mathematics
Språk Rapporttyp ISBN

Language Report category
ISRN
Svenska/Swedish Licentiatavhandling
X Engelska/English X Examensarbete
C-uppsats Serietitel och serienummerISSN
D-uppsats Title of series, numbering 0348–2960
Övrig rapport
LiTH–MAT–Ex–98–13
URL för elektronisk version
Titel
Title
Analytic Solutions to Algebraic Equations
Författare Tomas Johansson

Author
Sammanfattning
Abstract
This report studies polynomial equations and how one solves them using
only the coefficients of the polynomial. It examines why it is impossible
to solve equations of degree greater than four using only radicals and how
instead one can solve them using elliptic functions. Although the quintic
equation is the main area of our investigation, we also present parts of
the history of algebraic equations, Galois theory, and elliptic functions.
Nyckelord Algebraic equation, Elliptic function, Galois theory, Polynomial, Quintic

Keyword
equation Theta function, Tschirnhaus transformation, Weierstrass func-
tion

Analytic Solutions To Algebraic Equations

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Analytic Solutions To Algebraic Equations

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Analytic Solutions to

Supervisor: Bengt Ove Turesson

2 Quadratic, cubic, and quartic equations 5

3 Solvability of algebraic equations 13

5 Hermite’s and Gordan’s solutions to the quintic 39

6 Kiepert’s algorithm for the quintic 43

2 Quadratic, cubic, and quartic equations

using the famous formula

2.2 Solving third and fourth degree equations

We will use cube roots of unity. Therefore let

If we make the substitution

Theorem 2.1 Both parentheses in the expression

give the same roots to (1).

The other roots in the parentheses are multiples of w. Therefore

Example 2.2 Solve the third degree equation

We begin by making the substitution

(y 2 + 2qy + p)(y 2 − 2qy + r) = 0 ⇔ y 4 + (r + p − 4q 2 )y 2 + 2q(r − p)y + pr = 0

and collect terms. This gives

If a1 = 0, we make the substitution t = y 2 , and obtain a quadratic equation in t. Otherwise,

64q 6 + 32a2 q 4 + 4(a22 − 4a0 )q 2 − a21 = 0.

Example 2.3 Solve the equation

x4 − 4x3 − 16x + 35 = 0. (4)

By letting x = y + 1, this equation is transformed into

We try to factorize this as above, and get

64q 6 − 192q 4 − 112q 2 − 576 = 16(q 2 − 4)(4q 4 + 4q 2 + q) = 0.

The roots of (4) will therefore be

2.3 Tschirnhaus transformations

xn + cn−1 xn−1 + . . . + c1 x + c0 = 0. (5)

xnk + cn−1 xn−1

Definition 2.4 The polynomials

Pk (x1 , . . . , xn ) = xk1 + xk2 + . . . + xkn , k = 0, 1, 2, . . . ,

are denoted the kth power polynomials.

Pk + . . . + c3 Pk−n+3 + c2 Pk−n+2 + c1 Pk−n+1 + c0 Pk−n = 0.

Proof We can write f as

f 0 (x) = nxn−1 + (P1 + ncn−1 )xn−2 + . . . + (Pn−1 + cn−1 Pn−2 + . . . + c2 P1 + nc1 ).

Differentiating the polynomial in the ordinary way gives

f 0 (x) = nxn−1 + (n − 1)cn−1 xn−2 + . . . + 2c2 x + c1 .

We have thus proved the theorem. ¤

• Calculate Pk (y1 , . . . , yn ) and express it in xk . Because xk is a root of an nth degree

• Decide which coefficients to eliminate in the new polynomial.

Example 2.6 Take the equation

We want to eliminate the xn−1 −term. Substitute

where a0 is an arbitrary constant. We will then get an equation in y of the form

We calculate P1 (y1 , . . . , yn ) and express in xk . Summation over k in the relation

P1 (y1 , . . . , yn ) + bn−1 = 0 and P1 (x1 , . . . , xn ) + cn−1 = 0.

Let bn−1 = 0. Then

where a = c51 /c40 .

3 Solvability of algebraic equations

3.1 History of the quintic

where k is an integer. We have

(1 − wk )(wk + w2k + . . . + w(n−1)k ) = 1 − w nk = 0.

(x − z1 )(x − z2 )(x − z3 ) = x3 − z13 and (x − z4 )(x − z5 )(x − z6 ) = x3 − z43 .

From this we get

We see that it is a quadratic equation in x3 as asserted.

If F ⊆ L, then Gal(E/F ) ⊇ Gal(E/L). Therefore we must have a corresponding chain

Gal(E/F ) = G1 ⊇ G2 ⊇ . . . ⊇ Gk = Gal(F/F ) = {e}.

3.2 Galois theory

Definition 3.2 An element u ∈ E is algebraic if there exists a nonzero polynomial

An extension is called algebraic if every element of E is algebraic over F . We will only

θ : F [x] → E by θ(f (x)) = f (u),

Definition 3.4 If a polynomial f ∈ F [x] splits in an extension field E, i.e.,

where x1 , . . . , xn ∈ E, then E is called a splitting field for f .

Assume that we have a polynomial