I was asked to expand on my comments with a more detailed answer, so here goes:
Part (a)
Now,
is clearly a factor of the RHS of statement (1), and so must also be a factor of
. However, with
and
being coprime (and so sharing no factors other than
, it follows that either
or
is a factor of
. In either case,
divides
.
Similarly,
is clearly a factor of the RHS of statement (2), and so must also be a factor of
. However, with
and
being coprime (and so sharing no factors other than
, it follows that either
or
is a factor of
. In either case,
divides
.
The equation (*) is the same equation with
and
. For this equation to have a rational root requires
divides
and
divides
or that they are
. In other words, the only possible rational roots of (*) are
. However:
Hence, the equation (*) has no rational roots.
Part (b)
In fact, since
(as that would make the root being tested rational, which is impossible from part (a)), we have actually shown that
, and also that
.
Testing
will yield
using these results, confirming that it must also be a root.
Knowing that two of the roots are
and
and setting the third root to
, it follows that
but this makes the third root rational, which is impossible by part (a), and so there can be no root of the form
.